Media Watch and Buzz

Fox News' Eric Bolling repeated the discredited claim that the stimulus has "done nothing to help the economy." In fact, economists agree that GDP and employment levels are significantly higher than they would have been without the stimulus.

Bolling pushes myth that the stimulus failed

Bolling: The stimulus has "done nothing to help the economy." During the September 1 edition of Fox & Friends, guest host Eric Bolling claimed that the stimulus has "done nothing to help the economy" and that "the economy is far worse than it was when we signed over $750 billion that turned into $862 billion." Bolling added, "Forget the other programs, it's literally trillions of dollars of economic stimulus that aren't working."

Independent and private analysts agree stimulus significantly raised GDP, employment

CEA: Recovery act raised GDP by at least 2.7 percent in the second quarter of 2010. In its fourth quarterly report on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) stated that "the ARRA has raised the level of GDP as of the second quarter of 2010, relative to what it otherwise would have been, by between 2.7 and 3.2 percent."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised GDP. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing the GDP. Included in these figures is the estimate by the nonpartisan CBO, which estimated that the stimulus raised GDP "by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent." CEA included the following chart in its report:

CEA: Recovery act has raised employment "by between 2.5 and 3.6 million." In its fourth quarterly report on the ARRA, the CEA stated: "The CEA estimates that as of the second quarter of 2010, the ARRA has raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.5 and 3.6 million. These estimates are broadly consistent with the direct recipient reporting data available for 2010:Q1."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised employment. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing employment:

Economists say stimulus helped economic recovery

WSJ: 70 percent of economists surveyed said stimulus helped. The Wall Street Journal reported on March 12 that 38 of the 54 economists it surveyed "said the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act boosted growth and mitigated job losses, while six said the legislation had a net negative effect."

ABC News: Most on panel of economists "think the economy would be worse" without the stimulus. ABC News reported on February 18 that "most" of the economists on its panel "think the economy would be worse today without the big aid package, which totaled $787 billion and was signed into law by President Obama on Feb. 17, 2009."

NABE: 83 percent say stimulus raised GDP. A February survey of 203 members of the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) found that "[e]ighty-three percent believe that GDP is currently higher than it would have been without the 2009 stimulus package (ARRA)."

USA Today: Surveyed economists said "stimulus package saved jobs." USA Today reported on January 25:

President Obama's stimulus package saved jobs -- but the government still needs to do more to breathe life into the economy, according to USA TODAY's quarterly survey of 50 economists.

Unemployment would have hit 10.8% -- higher than December's 10% rate -- without Obama's $787 billion stimulus program, according to the economists' median estimate. The difference would translate into another 1.2 million lost jobs.

Many economists say we need a second stimulus

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz: "The U.S. Congress has to pass a second stimulus." In January comments before the Council on Foreign Relations, Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz reportedly said that the "stimulus has made a difference" and that "[t]he U.S. Congress has to pass a second stimulus." An August 5 Bloomberg article reported that Stiglitz said it was "absolutely clear that you need a second round of stimulus."

Nobel laureate Robert Solow: There is "need for further stimulus, of serious magnitude." In an August 10 Daily Beast blog post, Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert M. Solow wrote that "our economy is limping along" and that "[i]t would be foolhardy to sit and wait for a spontaneous burst of consumer spending or business investment in a sluggish economy with high unemployment." Solow argued for "further stimulus, of serious magnitude."

Economists have been pushing for additional stimulus for more than a year. A July 13, 2009, post on The New York Times' Economix blog listed economists that supported additional stimulus spending, including Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, former CBO director Robert D. Reischauer, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research Dean Baker, Berkeley economist Brad DeLong, University of Oregon economics professor Mark Thoma, and Yale economics professor Robert Shiller.

Berkeley economist Laura Tyson: We need a second stimulus. In an August 28 New York Times op-ed headlined "Why we need a second stimulus," Laura Tyson, a Berkeley economist who served as chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton administration and is a current member of Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, wrote that there is "too little appreciation for how stimulus spending has helped stabilize the economy and how more of the right kind of government spending could boost job creation and economic growth."

Following President Obama's speech on the end of combat operations in Iraq, media outlets hosted discredited Bush administration officials Karl Rove, Stephen Hadley, and Ari Fleischer to respond, despite the fact that the three were at the forefront of the campaign of misinformation used to sell the war.

Rove led WH group that "promoted" view that Saddam had WMDs "and was seeking more"

White House Iraq Group was formed to "set [messaging] strategy" for going to war with Iraq. The Washington Post reported in 2003 (accessed via Nexis), that the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) was formed in August 2002 "to set strategy for each stage of the confrontation with Baghdad. A senior official who participated in its work called it 'an internal working group, like many formed for priority issues, to make sure each part of the White House was fulfilling its responsibilities.' " Part of WHIG's mission, according to the Post, was to decide "what to demand of the United Nations in the president's Sept. 12 [2002] address to the General Assembly, when to take the issue to Congress, and how to frame the conflict with Iraq in the midterm election campaign that began in earnest after Labor Day." Rove was a regular participant in this group.

WHIG promoted view that Saddam "had weapons of mass destruction and was seeking more." The Los Angeles Times reported on August 25, 2005, (accessed via Nexis) that WHIG "promoted the view that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was seeking more":

The group consisted of Rove, Libby, White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr., then-national security advisor Condoleezza Rice and her deputy, Stephen Hadley, and Mary Matalin, Cheney's media advisor. All are believed to have been questioned in the leak case; papers and e-mails about the group were subpoenaed.

Before the war, this Iraq group promoted the view that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was seeking more. In September 2002, the White House embraced a British report asserting that "Iraq has sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

The Washington Post further reported that WHIG "assigned Communications Director James R. Wilkinson to prepare a white paper for public release, describing the 'grave and gathering danger' of Iraq's allegedly 'reconstituted' nuclear program." From the October 30, 2005, article (accessed via Nexis):

By summer 2002, the White House Iraq Group assigned Communications Director James R. Wilkinson to prepare a white paper for public release, describing the "grave and gathering danger" of Iraq's allegedly "reconstituted" nuclear weapons program. Wilkinson gave prominent place to the claim that Iraq "sought uranium oxide, an essential ingredient in the enrichment process, from Africa." That claim, along with repeated use of the "mushroom cloud" image by top officials beginning in September, became the emotional heart of the case against Iraq.

Rove repeatedly politicized national security issues, including the war in Iraq, and actively encouraged GOP to campaign on the issue. Think Progress has documented Rove's address, President Bush made the now-infamous claim that "[t]he British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," a claim that was highly disputed and which turned out to be false. In 2003, then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley reportedly accepted responsibility for the line appearing in Bush's address, despite having received two memos and a phone call from CIA Director George Tenet three months earlier raising objections to its inclusion in prior speeches. From a July 2003 FoxNews.com article: 

Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley in a rare on-the-record session with reporters, said that he had received two memos from the CIA and a phone call from agency Director George Tenet last October raising objections to an allegation that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium ore from Africa to use in building nuclear weapons.

As a result, Hadley said the offending passage was excised from a speech on Iraq the president gave in Cincinnati last Oct. 7. But Hadley suggested that details from the memos and phone call had slipped from his attention as the State of the Union was being put together. 

The false claim was credited as one of the bases for shifting public support for the war. As a July 2003 New York Times analysis noted:

The speeches worked. Public opposition to the war, never fierce, began to melt, polls show, and by mid-March, when hostilities began, more than 60 percent agreed that ousting Mr. Hussein was worth spilling American blood.

Today, those 16 words haunt the administration. They are the best-remembered flourish in a portrait of Iraq that today seems unrecognizable. They are a leading rationale for a war that has resulted in the death of 224 Americans. And they are either unsubstantiated or based on a lie.

Hadley was also a part of the White House Iraq Group. According to a 2003 Washington Post 4/10/03]

• "Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly ... all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes." [3/21/03]

• "We know for a fact that there are weapons there." [1/9/03]

• "Saddam Hussein does not exactly have a track record of telling the world the truth. So he, on December 8th, has to indicate whether or not he has weapons. Let's see what he says. If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world." [12/2/02]

• "[G]iven the chance to throw off a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein, people will rejoice." [3/21/03]

• "[W]hen you take a look at the level of violence inside of Iraq, it is impossible to argue anything other than violence has, indeed, come down as a result of America's military operations." [6/25/03]

• "There is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly. ... And all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes." [3/21/03]

Despite their history, media turns to Hadley, Fleischer and Rove to respond to Obama's speech

Kilmeade hosts Hadley to discuss whether "the president is finally acknowledging the previous administration was...on the right track in the middle east overall." On the September 1 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Brian Kilmeade hosted two Bush administration officials, Margaret O'Sullivan and Hadley, to discuss whether "the president is finally acknowledging the previous administration was right - was on the right track in the Middle East overall." 

MSNBC's Morning Joe hosts Fleischer to defend Bush and compare invading Iraq to invading Nazi Germany.  On September 1, MSNBC's Morning Joe hosted Fleischer to defend Bush for invading Iraq, and Fleischer compared Iraq to the invasion of Nazi Germany:

FLEISCHER: Probably the most profound meeting I ever sat on at the White House was a meeting with Elie Weisel. Just President Bush, Elie Wiesel, Condi Rice was there and myself. And the president asked Elie Wiesel - Nobel Peace Prize winner, Holocaust survivor - should he remove Saddam [Hussein]. Wiesel said yes, and then he added, "If only the world had listened to Winston Churchill in 1938 or 1939, World War II and the Holocaust could have been avoided. And I thought to myself, if the world had listened to Churchill in '38, people probably would've said "you exaggerated the threat of Hitler. You know, who says there was a World War coming?" We'll never know what we averted by getting rid of Saddam and how many lives were saved as a result of removing the threat of Saddam Hussein.

Rove: "This was not a well-delivered speech." On September 1, Fox News' On the Record with Greta van Sustern hosted Rove to attack Obama's Iraq speech, saying: "[T]his was not a well-delivered speech."  Rove called Obama's mention of Bush "an attempt at graciousness" that "didn't succeed," and he criticized Obama for not taking a "confident" tone that showed "a celebration of what has happened" in Iraq "to this point."

Fox News' Dave Briggs attacked the Department of Justice for asking election officials in Ohio to print ballots in Spanish, which he claimed would not be "a proper use of funds." But the Justice Department reportedly says the ballots are needed to obey federal law, which prohibits making a person educated in a Spanish-language school in Puerto Rico understand English in order to vote.

Briggs claims enforcing federal voting law is not "a proper use of funds"

Briggs: Spanish ballots are not "proper use of funds." During the August 31 edition of Fox & Friends, guest host Dave Briggs claimed that the Department of Justice "is demanding" that Cuyahoga County, Ohio, election officials "print ballots in Spanish," and said, "The cost, again, $500,000 estimated, for what some say is 6,000 voters, which does sound like not a proper use of funds." He then asked a guest, "But, beyond that, I mean, do you think this is something that is absolutely required, is necessary, in our country?"

Plain Dealer: DOJ told Cuyahoga County "it needed to better accommodate voters educated in Puerto Rico." In an August 25 blog post, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that "the Justice Department told the [Cuyahoga] elections board July 29 that it needed to better accommodate voters educated in Puerto Rico who have limited English-speaking ability. At issue is part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that requires full voting opportunity for people from Puerto Rico, which makes them full U.S. citizens, but who are educated in primarily Spanish-language schools."

Federal law prohibits making Puerto Ricans educated in Spanish-language schools understand English in order to vote. According to provision of federal law originally enacted in the Voting Rights Act of 1965 explicitly protects the rights of Puerto Rican voters educated in U.S. schools to vote regardless of their ability to understand English:

(1) Congress hereby declares that to secure the rights under the fourteenth amendment of persons educated in American-flag schools in which the predominant classroom language was other than English, it is necessary to prohibit the States from conditioning the right to vote of such persons on ability to read, write, understand, or interpret any matter in the English language.

(2) No person who demonstrates that he has successfully completed the sixth primary grade in a public school in, or a private school accredited by, any State or territory, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in which the predominant classroom language was other than English, shall be denied the right to vote in any Federal, State, or local election because of his inability to read, write, understand, or interpret any matter in the English language, except that in States in which State law provides that a different level of education is presumptive of literacy, he shall demonstrate that he has successfully completed an equivalent level of education in a public school in, or a private school accredited by, any State or territory, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in which the predominant classroom language was other than English.

Bush DOJ said the provision "requires jurisdictions to provide" ballots in minority languages. In September 2008 congressional testimony, Grace Chung Becker, then the acting assistant attorney general for the Bush Justice Department civil rights division, testified that the provision "requires jurisdictions to provide election materials, including ballots, in the required minority language for voters who are limited-English proficient (LEP) and who were educated in an American school in which the predominant classroom language was not English."

Briggs falsely claims English is "official language" of U.S.

Briggs: "English is the only official language of the United States." Introducing the discussion, Briggs asked, "English is the only official language of the United States, but should it be the only language on the ballot this November?"

FACT: U.S. does not have an official language. According to the government website USA.gov, "Congress has never declared an 'official' language for the United States." Likewise, MSNBC.com reported in 2009, "The United States has no official language."

In attacking DOJ, Briggs dredged up discredited attacks

Briggs: DOJ is "accused of stalling on the MOVE Act, which denies our troops the rights to vote." In the same segment, Briggs said the Justice Department was "accused of stalling on the MOVE Act, which denies our troops the rights to vote." Briggs' claim echoed the discredited attacks from conservative activists that the Justice Department was "ignoring" the act by "encouraging waivers."

FACT: The waiver process is built into the MOVE Act. The MOVE Act, which helps to ensure that troops overseas can exercise their right to vote, contained a provision that permitted states that would have an "undue hardship" in providing ballots 45 days before an election to apply for a waiver, which the Department of Defense must approve.

Briggs: DOJ "ignored" phony New Black Panther scandal because it has "not pressed charges." In the same segment, Briggs claimed that the Justice Department has "not pressed charges against the Black Panthers who clearly committed voter intimidation. So why choose this case to make such a big deal of when others are ignored?"

FACT: DOJ did press charges in the New Black Panther case. The DOJ successfully obtained default judgment against King Samir Shabazz, a member of the New Black Panther Party carrying a nightstick outside a Philadelphia polling center on Election Day 2008.

Story is another in a string of discredited, Fox-promoted attacks against DOJ

Fox News has hyped phony New Black Panthers scandal at least 95 times. On July 16, Media Matters for America reported that over the course of two weeks, six Fox News shows discussed the discredited New Black Panthers scandal during a total of 95 segments after Megyn Kelly's June 30 interview hyping GOP activist J. Christian Adams' unsubstantiated accusations. In all, these Fox shows devoted more than eight hours of airtime to discussing the New Black Panthers.

Fox News also pushing Adams' false claim that DOJ is "ignoring" military law. Fox News also heavily promoted the baseless "controversy" that the DOJ is attempting to ignore the MOVE Act in order to help Democrats "skew" the fall elections.

Right-wing media have frequently cited Bjorn Lomborg to downplay the danger of global warming. In his forthcoming book, Lomborg will reportedly declare global warming a "chief concern facing the world today" and recommend spending $100 billion annually on clean energy technology financed by a global carbon emissions tax.

Lomborg: Global warming "a challenge humanity must confront"

Bjorn Lomborg's new book declares global warming "a challenge humanity must confront." On August 30, U.K.'s The Guardian reported of Lomborg, "[t]he world's most high-profile climate skeptic is to declare that global warming is 'undoubtedly one of the chief concerns facing the world today' and 'a challenge humanity must confront.' " In his latest book, which will be published next month, Lomborg will reportedly call for "[i]nvesting $100bn annually" so that "we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century." Lomborg recommended "pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power," and advocates for a "tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change."

Previously, Lomborg said climate change "is emphatically not the end of the world." In his 2007 book, Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming, Lomborg stated that while "climate change is a problem ... it is emphatically not the end of the world." He also contended that "the benefits from moderately using fossil fuels vastly outweigh the costs. Yes, the costs are obvious in the 'fear, terror and disaster' we read about in the papers every day, but the benefits, though much more prosaic, are nonetheless important." Lomborg also suggested that the money spent combating climate change would be better spent in other areas that do more "social good."

Right-wing media has frequently cited Lomborg to minimize threat of global warming

Conservative media figures and outlets have frequently cited or hosted Lomborg to downplay the potential danger of global warming; to make the point that attempts to prevent it would be overly expensive and ineffective; or to promote the idea that public officials should instead focus on more pressing issues. Fox example:  

Lomborg appeared in 2006 Fox News special that centered upon purported lack of "scientific consensus about" impact of climate change. On May 21, 2006, Fox News aired a special titled Global Warming: The Debate Continues. As Media Matters has previously noted, the special gave viewers the impression that there is a significant divide among scientists regarding the cause and effects of global warming. One of these contributors was Lomborg, who claimed that climate change was not an imminent threat and that "the data, the facts tell you that many, many things are moving in the right direction."

Beck hosted Lomborg to discuss how "our priorities are all mixed up" on climate change. On the September 21, 2006, edition of his CNN Headline News show, Glenn Beck hosted Lomborg to discuss how "our priorities are all mixed up" on climate change and his decision to switch from being an environmental activist to a "skeptical environmentalist." On the show, Lomborg claimed that "climate change is happening, but the real question we have to ask ourselves is: How much can we do against it? And how much is it going to cost?"

Beck featured Lomborg in two-hour special on "the other side of the climate debate." On May 2, 2007, Beck aired a two-hour special on "the other side of the climate debate" titled Exposed: The Climate of Fear. In the special, Beck introduced Lomborg as "an expert on the economic impact of global warming," but noted that he is "not a scientist." Lomborg said during the interview:

With global warming you're going to see more heat deaths, but what most people don't tell us is we're also going to see much less cold deaths.

And actually, many more people die from cold than from heat, so for England alone you mentioned the number 2,000 people. Actually that's what we expect will die from more heat waves in 2080, but what we have to remember is that 20,000 fewer will die from cold each year in 2080.

Now I'm not sitting and saying we should go for global warming, but I'm saying we need to know both.

He also said, "We worry intensely about climate change, but the point is we can do very little good at very high cost."

NRO's Goldberg called the science of the environmental movement into question citing research by Lomborg. In a May 20, 2008 column in the Los Angeles Times, National Review Online's Jonah Goldberg criticized the "irrational" environmental movement for "claiming to be so much more rational and scientific than those silly sky-God worshipers and deranged oil addicts." Goldberg used Bjorn Lomborg's analysis of the Kyoto Protocol to bolster his argument by falsely suggesting that climate change is not a grave threat to the polar bear population. Goldberg suggested that, contrary to the statements of environmentalists, the polar bear population is "thriving," and that, according to Lomborg, adopting provisions of the Kyoto protocol "would save exactly one polar bear."

Lomborg repeatedly appeared on Hannity & Colmes to claim that effects of global warming are "exaggerated." Lomborg was a guest on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes twice in 2007 to discuss climate change and its potential effects [via Nexis]. On March 21, Lomborg criticized Al Gore for his "wildly exaggerated stories about what's going to happen" and "using the catastrophe sense to push through legislation ... that are actually fairly bad, in the sense that they will cost a lot and do very little good." On September 4, Sean Hannity introduced Lomborg as an author who "debunks numerous popular myths about global warming, such as sea levels rising, decreasing polar bear populations and the recent increase of hurricanes." In his appearance, Lomborg discussed rising sea levels that result from global warming and claimed that he doesn't believe we will "incur a huge catastrophe" as a result.

NewsBusters writers frequently cite Lomborg in their attempts to minimize threat of climate change. On numerous occasions, writers at NewsBusters have criticized media reports on climate change using Lomborg's writings and statements as evidence that "there are far more serious problems" than global warming "facing the planet." For example, Noel Sheppard highlighted author Michael Crichton's praise of Lomborg's book, and said of Lomborg, "It is plain to see why Lomborg is such a controversial figure, as he is not afraid to call a spade a spade regardless of who might find such straight talk inconvenient."

Glenn Beck recently announced that he would leave a church that "preach[ed] who to vote for," while discussing his 8-28 "Restoring Honor" rally. However, Beck is working with James Dobson on the formation of his "Black Robe Regiment," who, along with his organizations, has a history of trying to influence elections through churches, including advocating for pastors to endorse political candidates.

Beck says he "would leave [his] church" if it "started to preach who to vote for"

Beck: "If my church started to preach who to vote for, oh, the Republicans are better than the Democrats or vice versa, I would also leave my church on that." On the August 30 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, discussing his 8-28 rally, Beck said, "If my church started to preach who to vote for, oh, the Republicans are better than the Democrats or vice versa, I would also leave my church on that." From The O'Reilly Factor:

BILL O'REILLY (host): Now let's talk about the theocratic theme of the event. So there's -- do you think America should be run with a Judeo-Christian model of behavior? Is that what you want in the halls of power?

BECK: That's what we've -- well --

O'REILLY: We had it at one time? We did have it?

BECK: For our behavior? Yes. Does that mean that I want -- for instance, I've gotten in a lot of trouble for saying if my church is teaching social justice the way that Jeremiah Wright teaches social justice, leave your church. Let me say the same thing. If my church started to preach who to vote for, oh, the Republicans are better than the Democrats or vice versa, I would also leave my church on that. Teach people correct principles that all rights come from God.

Beck noted that he was working with Dobson in forming Black Robe Regiment

Beck said that he discussed with Dobson formation of Black Robe Regiment. Discussing his Black Robe Regiment initiative earlier in the day on his radio show, Beck said that there were religious leaders he met with who were wary of the initiative and were concerned that if they joined him they would "lose half [of their] congregation." However, Beck said, Dobson endorsed the initiative. According to Beck, Dobson "looked [Beck] right in the eye ... and he said; 'I will start tomorrow.' "

But Dobson and his organizations have history of using churches to influence elections

ADF, which Dobson co-founded, encouraged pastors to endorse candidates in 2008 and "challenge IRS rules that prohibit tax-exempt churches from engaging in partisan politics." In a September 2008 post onThe Washington Post's On Faith blog, David Waters wrote that the Alliance Defense Fund, which Dobson co-founded, "is recruiting preachers to challenge IRS rules that prohibit tax-exempt churches from engaging in partisan politics, step up to the pulpit ... and endorse a candidate." From the blog post:

The ADF is recruiting preachers to challenge IRS rules that prohibit tax-exempt churches from engaging in partisan politics, step up to the pulpit Sept. 28 and endorse a candidate.

ADF officials say this will be a courageous act of civil disobedience to defend free speech. It's really just a stunt by a conservative Christian organization to get evangelical Revs. to rev up the base for the Republican Party ticket. ADF was founded years ago by leaders of more than 30 Christian groups, including Focus on the Family's James Dobson, a born-again convert to the McCain-Palin Republican Party ticket.

Not that conservative evangelicals are the only churchgoers who appreciate a good stump speech under the cross on Sunday morning. Democratic candidates have been known to increase their church attendance in campaign seasons, especially in African-American churches. In too many churches, the long liturgical season between Easter and Advent isn't "Ordinary Time," it's "Campaign Time."

It's clearly Campaign Time for the ADF. "The (Sept. 28) sermon will be an evaluation of conditions for office in light of scripture and doctrine. They will make a specific recommendation from the pulpit about how the congregation would vote," ADF attorney Erik Stanley told the Post. "They could oppose a candidate. They could oppose both candidates. They could endorse a candidate. They could focus on a federal, state or local election."

Beck recently promoted ADF's "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" initiative, in which "several hundred preachers" say to IRS: "[C]ome after me. I dare you." On the August 27 edition of his Fox News show, Beck hosted former co-chair of the Texas Republican Party and evangelical minister David Barton, who touted this year's "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" initiative, saying that "you'll have several hundred preachers standing up and saying, 'IRS, come after me. I dare you. Come get me.'" Beck later told Barton that "you've got to come back next week ... because we have to talk about that" and stated: "Oh, America, oh, tell your preachers and your pastors and your priests and your rabbis about this. Please." Beck has credited Barton as suggesting the formation of the "Black Robe Regiment," and Barton spoke at Beck's August 27 "Divine Destiny" event.

In 2006, Dobson's group sought "'church coordinators' who would encourage pastors to 'speak about Christian citizenship,' conduct voter-registration drives, distribute voter guides and run get-out-the-vote efforts." An August 16, 2006, Washington Post article reported that Dobson's Focus on the Family organization sought "'church coordinators' who would encourage pastors to 'speak about Christian citizenship,' conduct voter-registration drives, distribute voter guides and run get-out-the-vote efforts." The Post reported also reported that Focus on the Family "said its efforts would be nonpartisan." From the Post:

Conservative Christian radio host James C. Dobson's national organization, Focus on the Family, said yesterday that it will work with affiliated groups in eight battleground states to mobilize evangelical voters in the November elections.

In targeting individual churches the way political organizers traditionally pinpointed certain wards, Focus on the Family is filling a void left by the near-collapse of the Christian Coalition and stepping into an area where recent Republican Party efforts have created resentment among evangelicals.

As a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization, Focus on the Family is barred from endorsing candidates. Tom Minnery, vice president of the Colorado-based group, said its efforts would be nonpartisan.

[...]

In an e-mail message to supporters last week, Focus on the Family said it would partner with its state-level "family policy councils" to "combat voter apathy and encourage Christians to go to the polls" in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, New Jersey, Minnesota, Montana and Tennessee. Minnery, in a telephone interview, said those states were chosen for their "live, hotly contested races."

The e-mail said Focus on the Family is looking for volunteer county coordinators whose duties would include "recruiting key evangelical churches." It also is seeking "church coordinators" who would encourage pastors to "speak about Christian citizenship," conduct voter-registration drives, distribute voter guides and run get-out-the-vote efforts.

In 2006, Dobson reportedly "work[ed] with ministers around Minnesota to mobilize in time to influence the Nov. 7 elections." The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported in September 2006 [accessed via Nexis] that "[a]s part of a campaign to rouse Christian conservative voters, Dobson is coming to the Twin Cities next week to speak. His group also is working with ministers around Minnesota to mobilize in time to influence the Nov. 7 elections." While the article noted that Dobson had previously "stressed that they wouldn't tell people how to vote," he also said that"[w]hether Republicans deserve the power they were given, the alternatives are downright frightening." From the Star-Tribune:

As part of a campaign to rouse Christian conservative voters, Dobson is coming to the Twin Cities next week to speak. His group also is working with ministers around Minnesota to mobilize in time to influence the Nov. 7 elections.

Republicans counting on a strong turnout of Christian conservatives at the polls may have other reasons for concern. Midterm elections often do not excite the masses. A signature issue, such as a ban on same-sex marriage, is on the ballot in fewer states this year. And the federal government has promised to crack down on church-based partisan politicking after complaints about such behavior in 2004, which could suppress religious leaders' involvement and dampen turnout.

Dobson and others are working hard to counter that possibility, though they acknowledge their disappointment.

"Whether Republicans deserve the power they were given, the alternatives are downright frightening,"Dobson told more than 3,000 attendees at a recent "Stand for the Family" rally in Pittsburgh.

The event was the first of three designed to energize Christian conservative voters. All three are in states that have hotly contested Senate races: Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Tennessee.

The Pittsburgh event was part political rally, part church revival. Held at a downtown hockey arena, it featured entertainment by the Christian pop group the Sounds of Liberty. An enormous U.S. flag hung behind the speakers, who included Dobson, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Gary Bauer of American Values. All warned of threats to religious liberty, to marriage and, as Perkins put it, of "our children being indoctrinated with homosexuality in our public schools."

All the speakers stressed that they wouldn't tell people how to vote.

But if a politician shares his principles on issues from judges to marriage "and is committed to the God of the universe, and from my perspective, Jesus Christ his only begotten son ... it would be a sin not to go to the polls and vote for him or her," Dobson said.

On Fox & Friends, Fox Business anchor Stuart Varney continued attacking unemployment insurance, by seizing on a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed by Harvard economist Robert Barro, which claimed that unemployment rates would have been at 6.8% had Congress not extended unemployment benefits. But Barro's theory and similar claims -- that extending unemployment benefits in the current recession provide a disincentive for people to find work -- have been widely disputed by experts.

Varney cites WSJ op-ed in continued attack on unemployment insurance

Varney seizes on WSJ op-ed to claim that "unemployment would be at 6.8%, not the 9.5%," if Congress hadn't "extended unemployment benefits." On the August 31 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Varney cited a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz wrote that "America's economy is headed for a major slowdown" and that "[t]he country needs stimulus." Proceeding to describe the "optimal package," Stiglitz recommended: "We should begin by strengthening the unemployment insurance system, because money received by the unemployed would be spent immediately." 

Blinder: "Extending unemployment benefits is one of the best forms of stimulus we know." On July 2, NPR reported that former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve and Clinton economic adviser Alan Blinder "supports the effort to extend expiring unemployment benefits." NPR quoted Blinder as saying: "Extending unemployment benefits is one of the best forms of stimulus we know." 

Martire: Stimulus from unemployment benefits "greater than any other fiscal action government can take." In a June 30 piece in the State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois, Center for Tax and Budget Accountability Executive Director Ralph Martire wrote: 

As for the contention that extending UI encourages people to avoid finding jobs so they can stay on the public dole -- well, it's just plain goofy. In May 2010, the private sector created only 41,000 jobs. That's 72,000 less than what's needed to keep up with the demand generated by natural work-force growth, much less creating the positions needed for the unemployed to find work. No one's thumbing a nose at getting hired to live in luxury eating government cheese -- there simply are no private sector jobs available. 

Perhaps the hawks have forgotten that consumer spending accounts for more than two-thirds of the nation's economy. The best consumers are low- and middle-income folks, who don't earn enough to save, so they spend their paychecks. That is, when they have paychecks. See, if they've lost their jobs and the private sector isn't creating jobs and the feds cut off unemployment benefits, their ability to spend drops to, well, nil. Which is why the amount of private sector economic activity stimulated by unemployment benefits is greater than any other fiscal action government can take. In fact, dollar-for-dollar, it's five times more stimulative than the Bush tax cuts. 

Sure, the long-term deficit has to be dealt with -- but honestly and responsibly. Short-term, deficit spending -- particularly on things like unemployment insurance, food stamps, housing assistance and the like -- is creating jobs and saving the U.S. economy from disaster. 

EPI's Mishel explains why unemployment insurance is "such good stimulus." In a June 10 hearing before the House Ways and Means Income Security and Family Support Subcommittee, the Economic Policy Institute's Lawrence Mishel testifed:

As I have explained, the only real option for increasing economic activity and consumer demand for goods and services is federal government intervention in the economy, specifically through more deficit spending. The safety net programs are a vital part of this picture. 

[...] 

The reason extending unemployment insurance is such good stimulus is that it gets money to people who are the most likely to have depleted their savings and thus tend to have no choice but to quickly spend essentially every dollar they receive on necessities found in their local economy. In other words, virtually every dollar spent on extending unemployment insurance benefits goes directly, and immediately, toward the purchase of local goods and services, providing an extremely efficient demand boost. Not only is extending and expanding UI benefits the right thing to do for the people hurt most by this economic downturn, it is also excellent economic policy.

CEPR's Schmitt: Unemployment insurance helps "sustain a community." In an April 28 article, McClatchy Newspapers reported:

And allowing workers to fall off the unemployment insurance rolls can have negative ripple effects, said John Schmitt, senior economist with the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

"It hits individuals hard, but it also hits their communities, and more broadly the country," Schmitt said. "Having unemployment insurance benefits can help sustain a community through a very difficult time."  

The right-wing media is "giddy" over the possibility of winning a Republican majority in Congress in order to shut down the government. The shutdowns cost the government at least $800 million, furloughed over a million workers, delayed veterans benefits, shut down federally funded research, and suspended certain law enforcement activities, among other things. 

The 1995-1996 gov't shutdowns had massive impact on public and cost the government at least $800 million

Federal government shutdowns occur when Congress cannot agree to pass a federal budget.  According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, Federal government shutdowns occur for the following reasons:

Shutdowns of the federal government have occurred in the past due to failures to pass regular appropriations bills by the October 1 deadline; lack of an agreement on stopgap funding for federal government operations through a continuing resolution; and other impasses, for example, in 1995, the lack of an agreement on lifting the federal debt ceiling.

Then-speaker Gingrich was criticized for orchestrating two government shutdowns in FY 1996, which cost the government at least $800 million.  Between November 1995 and January 1996, two federal government shutdowns occurred. As Time reported:

As the clocks struck midnight on Nov. 14, 1995, so began the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history. For 21 days -- from Nov. 14-19 and again from Dec. 16, 1995-Jan. 6, 1996 -- nonessential government employees stayed home while their leaders fought to pass a federal budget. The shutdown was sparked when an agreement between President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress (led by then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich) could not be reached by Sept. 30, the expiration date of the previous year's budget. In the end, the shutdown, which cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees, was settled when Clinton submitted a budget that proposed to eliminate the federal deficit in seven years.

Delay: Gingrich "told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him...sit at the back of Air Force One." In his book No Retreat, No Surrender: One American's Fight, Tom Delay, who was the Republican House Whip at the time of the shutdown, wrote:

Negotiations spiraled downward, and after Clinton vetoed a stopgap spending bill, funding for government services ran out, and a shutdown began on November 13, 1995. Not long after, Gingrich made the mistake of his life. He told a room full of reporters that he forced the shutdown because Clinton had rudely made him and Bob Dole sit at the back of Air Force One and exit from the rear on a flight to the funeral of assassinated Israeli prime minister [sic] Yitzak Rabin. It was pitiful. The New York Daily News carried the headline "Cry Baby" above a drawing of Newt as a screaming baby in diapers. The Democrats even tried to take a blowup of the cover onto the floor of the House.

The Hill also reported that Gingrich orchestrated the shutdown after President Bill Clinton made him and Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) sit at the back of Air Force One on a trip:

Gingrich received heavy criticism for helping to engineer the shutdown after it was reported he said that it was partially a result of Clinton's making former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and him sit at the back of Air Force One.

Over 1 million federal employees were furloughed.  According to the CRS report, over 1 million federal employees were furloughed as a result of the 1995-1996 government shutdown: 

The most recent shutdowns occurred in FY1996. There were two during the early part of the fiscal year. The first, November 14-19, 1995, resulted in the furlough of an estimated 800,000 federal employees. It was caused by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution (P.L. 104-31) agreed to on September 30, 1995, and by President Clinton's veto of a second continuing resolution and a debt limit extension bill.

The second FY1996 partial shutdown of the federal government, and the longest in history, began on December 16, 1995, and ended on January 6, 1996, after the White House and Congress agreed on a new resolution (P.L. 104-94) to fund the government through January 26, 1996. On January 2, 1996, the estimate of furloughed federal employees was 284,000.8 Another 475,000 federal employees, rated "essential," continued to work in a non-pay status. The shutdown was triggered by the expiration of a continuing funding resolution enacted on November 20 (P.L. 104-56), which funded the government through December 15, 1995. There were several short-term continuing resolutions between January 6, 1996, and April 26, 1996, when P.L. 104-134 was enacted to fund any agencies or programs not yet funded through FY1996.

Time: Shutdown "cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees." Time reported that the "the shutdown was sparked when an agreement between President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress (led by then Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich) could not be reached by Sept. 30, the expiration date of the previous year's budget. In the end, the shutdown, which cost the government $800 million in losses for salaries paid to furloughed employees, was settled when Clinton submitted a budget that proposed to eliminate the federal deficit in seven years."

 American veterans received "major curtailment in services," including health services.  The CRS reported that American veterans received "[m]ajor curtailment in services, ranging from health and welfare to finance and travel."

Health research, toxic waste clean-up were shut down.  The CRS reported that, according to "congressional hearings, press and agency accounts," new patients were not admitted to NIH:

New patients were not accepted into clinical research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ceased disease surveillance (information about the spread of diseases, such as AIDS and flu, were unavailable); hotline calls to NIH concerning diseases were not answered; and toxic waste clean-up work at 609 sites stopped, resulting in 2,400 "Superfund" workers being sent home.

Hiring of 400 border patrol agents was suspended.  The CRS report showed that law enforcement services were suspended, including hiring 400 border patrol agents.

Delays occurred in the processing of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives applications by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; work on more than 3,500 bankruptcy cases was suspended; cancellation of the recruitment and testing of federal law-enforcement officials occurred, including the hiring of 400 border patrol agents; and delinquent child-support cases were suspended.

200,000 U.S. visa/passport applications went unprocessed; tourist industries suffered millions of dollars in losses.  The CRS reported that:

20,000-30,000 applications by foreigners for visas went unprocessed each day; 200,000 U.S. applications for passports went unprocessed; and U.S. tourist industries and airlines sustained millions of dollars in losses. 

Parks/Museums/Monuments closed costing $14.2 million per day in tourism revenue. The CRS reported an estimated loss of $14.2 million per day in local communities near the national parks, museums, and monuments due to the shutdown:

Closure of 368 National Park Service sites (loss of 7 million visitors) occurred, with local communities near national parks losing an estimated $14.2 million per day in tourism revenues; and closure of national museums and monuments (estimated loss of 2 million visitors) occurred.

Nonetheless, right-wing media "giddy" for a similar shutdown

Erickson: "I'm almost giddy thinking about a government shutdown next year. I cannot wait!"  Via Twitter, Erick Erickson proclaimed:

In response to criticism over this statement, Erickson replied:

Morris: "There's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time."  On August 27, Fox News correspondent Dick Morris gave a speech at the Americans for Prosperity Foundation's Defending the Dream Conference, saying: "There's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time." 

So, it's going to be same time next year, guys and women. Same time next year. We're going to be back here and we're going to be pressuring the people who we helped elect to oppose big spending and we will be telling them you do not tread on us. Now, there's going to be a government shutdown just like in '95 and '96, but we're going to win it this time, and I'll be fighting on your side.

Gingrich using his old 1995 game plan to shape new GOP strategy: Take back Congress, "refuse to fund," and force Obama to respond.  In April 13 article, The Hill reported on Gingrich's comments encouraging the GOP to cause a government shutdown over health care reform:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said Tuesday that a government shutdown could occur should Republicans attempt to strip funding for the new healthcare law next Congress.

[...]

"A simple majority can refuse to fund. So, if you have Boehner as speaker and Mitch McConnell as majority leader, all you have to do is not write into the appropriations bill the money," Gingrich said at a breakfast sponsored by The American Spectator and Americans for Tax Reform. "If the president vetoes the appropriations bills, you repass them.

"The president has got to make it into a positive political issue to veto the appropriations bills. Remember, the only person who can close the government is the president. If you're prepared to pass the appropriations bills, he has to decide to veto a bill you have passed. And so you simply pass a bill."   

[...]

"You have to consistently communicate key messages because the presidency is such a powerful instrument," he said. "I think this city has fundamentally misunderstood what happened with the shutdown. To most of the country, it became a signal that we were serious...If we win we have every right to say 'the American people have spoken."

Asked if he would encourage the Republicans to push for a shutdown, Gingrich said that the GOP needs to be ready to stand on principle.

"It's especially important that they keep their word to the American people," he told The Hill. "[They] can't be intimidated...you have to believe what you believe in."

Dave Weigel reported that Gingrich similarly encouraged Republicans to send Obama a budget which refused to fund health care reform, and see if Obama "decide[s]...he's going to veto the bill" or not. From Wiegel's April 13 report:

At a luncheon at the Heritage Foundation -- his second meeting with conservative journalists and bloggers today -- Newt Gingrich expanded a bit on his argument, made most recently at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, that a new Republican Congress could roll back the Democrats' victory on health-care reform by refusing to fund it. I asked Gingrich how this would work, given the experience of Republicans in the winter of 1995 when a showdown over the budget forced a government shutdown.

"Wait a second," said Gingrich. "This is the standard, elite, inside-the-Beltway worldview. Tell me in what way we didn't win. After that, we got to a balanced budget. And what happened to the Republican majority?" The answer, of course, is that Republicans held the majority in 1996, while President Bill Clinton was reelected.

[...]

Gingrich, having argued that the 1995 shutdown was good for Republicans, argued that a potential battle over health care would be even better. "There's a new poll out this morning," said Gingrich, referring to a Rasmussen Reports study. "By 58 to 38, people want to repeal the health-care bill. It'll get worse as people learn more and as the failure of the bill becomes more obvious. So if you take that model, all the Republican Congress needs to say in January is, 'We won't fund it.' What the president needs to decide is: He's going to veto the bill. He needs to force a crisis on an issue that's a 58 to 38 issue. And it's going to get worse. It'll be 2 to 1 or better by the time we get down to the fight. Because this bill is terrible."

I followed up with Gingrich after the speech, largely to clarify how Clinton's reelection figured into this recollection of the shutdown. According to Gingrich, Clinton simply over-matched the Republicans in 1996 and skillfully made the speaker of the House his target. The ability of Republicans to hold onto Congress was impressiveness nonetheless. "I always look back on the budget fight as the moment our base decided we were real, that we weren't just politicians," said Gingrich. "I believe -- and John Kasich and Bob Livingston agree with me -- if we had backed off, we never would have gotten to a balanced budget."

Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett falsely claimed U.S. gross domestic product "contracted over the last three quarters" to suggest that the stimulus failed. In fact, GDP has increased for four consecutive quarters, and economists agree that GDP and employment levels are higher than they would have been without the stimulus.

Jarrett falsely claims GDP "contracted over the last three quarters"

Jarrett claims GDP "contracted over the last three quarters" and asks "would yet another stimulus be a waste of taxpayer money?" During the August 30 edition of Fox News' Happening Now, Jarrett claimed that the economic recovery act "failed to keep unemployment under 8 percent" and that "GDP has not grown but decelerated -- actually contracted over the last three quarters." Jarrett went on to ask, "[W]ould yet another stimulus be a waste of taxpayer money?"

GDP has increased in each of the last four quarters

Bureau of Economic Analysis: GDP has grown for the last four quarters. In an August 27 report, the Bureau of Economic Analysis estimated that GDP increased by 3.7 percent in the first quarter of 2010 and 1.6 percent in the second quarter of 2010. According to the BEA, GDP has increased during each of the past four quarters.

Fox News itself has acknowledged as fact that the economy has grown for the last four quarters. An August 27 FoxNews.com article reported that "[t]he economy has grown for four straight quarters." After Jarrett falsely claimed that GDP "contracted," Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, said that "the economy is not going down, it's growing, it's growing slowly," adding that this was "not terribly surprising."

Independent and private analysts agree stimulus significantly raised GDP, employment

CEA: Recovery act raised GDP by at least 2.7 percent in the second quarter of 2010. In its fourth quarterly report on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) stated that "the ARRA has raised the level of GDP as of the second quarter of 2010, relative to what it otherwise would have been, by between 2.7 and 3.2 percent."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised GDP. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing the GDP. Included in these figures is the estimate by the nonpartisan CBO, which estimated that the stimulus raised GDP "by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent." CEA included the following chart in its report:

CEA: Recovery act has raised employment "by between 2.5 and 3.6 million." In its fourth quarterly report on the ARRA, the CEA stated: "The CEA estimates that as of the second quarter of 2010, the ARRA has raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.5 and 3.6 million. These estimates are broadly consistent with the direct recipient reporting data available for 2010:Q1."

Independent analysts agree that recovery act significantly raised employment. In its quarterly report, the CEA included figures from independent analyses that also credited the recovery act with increasing employment:

Economists say stimulus helped economic recovery

WSJ: 70 percent of economists surveyed said stimulus helped. The Wall Street Journal reported on March 12 that 38 of the 54 economists it surveyed "said the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act boosted growth and mitigated job losses, while six said the legislation had a net negative effect."

ABC News: Most on panel of economists "think the economy would be worse" without the stimulus. ABC News reported on February 18 that "most" of the economists on its panel "think the economy would be worse today without the big aid package, which totaled $787 billion and was signed into law by President Obama on Feb. 17, 2009."

NABE: 83 percent say stimulus raised GDP. A February survey of 203 members of the National Association for Business Economics (NABE) found that "[e]ighty-three percent believe that GDP is currently higher than it would have been without the 2009 stimulus package (ARRA)."

USA Today: Surveyed economists said "stimulus package saved jobs." USA Today reported on January 25:

President Obama's stimulus package saved jobs -- but the government still needs to do more to breathe life into the economy, according to USA TODAY's quarterly survey of 50 economists.

Unemployment would have hit 10.8% -- higher than December's 10% rate -- without Obama's $787 billion stimulus program, according to the economists' median estimate. The difference would translate into another 1.2 million lost jobs.

Fox News baselessly suggested that Democrats would attempt to "skew" the fall elections by exempting "battleground" states from a requirement that they ship ballots to overseas military personnel at least 45 days before the election. This manufactured controversy has completely fallen apart: The only "battleground" state (as defined by Fox News) that received an exemption has a Republican official overseeing its elections. Moreover, the waiver process is part of the law and was mentioned during the debate over the legislation, which was co-sponsored by 26 Senate Republicans.

Fox suggests Dems will abuse voting rights law to swing close elections in "battlegrounds"

Fox suggests waivers are a "political move" by Democrats "fretting" over November elections. On the August 27 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy said, "There are 10 states out there that are trying to get an exemption from the [Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment] MOVE Act law, and four of them are expected to have hotly contested races in November -- races that could come down to just a few votes." Introducing a report from correspondent James Rosen, guest co-host Alisyn Camerota then asked, "So are the waiver requests a political move?" Rosen then claimed:

"You know, with some Democratic strategists and pollsters privately fretting about their party losing maybe 40 seats in the House and six or seven in the Senate, the votes of those overseas military personnel -- who register to vote in higher numbers than the general population -- could indeed prove decisive.

Later in his report, Rosen said, "Among the 10 states [requesting waivers] are some real battlegrounds with races shaping up as photo finishes, including Wisconsin and Colorado, where incumbent Senators Russ Feingold and Michael Bennet, respectively -- both Democrats -- are locked in races that RealClearPolitics.com rates as tossups." As he spoke, this graphic aired:

Fox: States with tight races seek waivers as Democrats are "fretting" over elections.  On the August 26 edition of Fox News' America Live, host Megyn Kelly introduced a report from Rosen on "whether our troops overseas will get the chance to vote in coming weeks as we lead up to the midterm elections." Kelly continued: "Ten states now say it might not happen. And four of those states have races so tight that a couple thousand votes could very well swing the election results." As Kelly spoke, a graphic appeared on-screen identifying Washington, Colorado, Wisconsin, and Maryland as four states where "military voters could decide races":

Rosen then claimed, "Some of the Democratic strategists and pollsters in this town are privately fretting about their party losing 40 seats in the House, maybe six or seven in the Senate. Therefore, the votes of these overseas military personnel -- who register to vote in higher numbers than the general population does -- could indeed, as you say, prove decisive."

Fox: The "perception" is that "these voters are gonna vote Republican" and that "states" "want to skew the results." On the August 25 edition of Fox & Friends, Camerota discussed the states' waiver requests with Fox News legal analyst Peter Johnson Jr. During the segment, Johnson said, "There's a perception -- and it's not true -- in American political history that somehow, voters are going to be Republican -- military voters are going to be Republican. That goes back to the Civil War. Since then, there's been no discernible pattern. ... But there is a perception, based on the historiography, that somehow these voters are gonna vote Republican." Camerota responded, "So, then it sounds like some people are suggesting that states would withhold their right, or mess it up somehow, because they want to skew the results."

DOD grants waiver to only one of Fox's "battlegrounds" -- and its top election official is Republican

Associated Press: WI, CO denied; MD dropped request. An August 27 Associated Press article reported that Wisconsin, Hawaii, Alaska, and Colorado "were denied requests on Friday to ignore a new federal law meant to protect the voting rights of deployed troops and other Americans overseas." It also stated, "Maryland initially asked for a waiver for its Sept. 14 primary, but then determined it could get the ballots to military and overseas voters before the election."

Sole "battleground" state (as defined by Fox) that received waiver has GOP secretary of state. The AP reported, "The Defense Department granted Delaware, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Washington the waivers." Sam Reed, Washington's secretary of state, is a Republican.

In a statement to Media Matters, Shane Hamlin, assistant director of elections for Washington state, explained the state's waiver request:

In October 2009, Congress passed new legislation called the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (the MOVE Act). Congress assumed that, in order to comply with the long-standing recommendation of a 45 day transit period, states must mail the ballots to military and overseas voters 45 days before Election Day. Consequently, Congress mandated in the MOVE Act that states mail ballots to military and overseas voters 45 days before Election Day. This timeframe does not comply with Washington's statutory deadlines for candidate filing, printing ballots, mailing and receiving ballots, or certifying the Primary or General Elections. For example, state law establishes that the Secretary of State's Office will certify the results of the Primary on Tuesday, September 7. The MOVE Act's 45 day deadline is Saturday, September 18, 2010. Eight business days is not enough time to reformat, print and distribute 55,000 - 65,000 ballot packets for military and overseas voters. Keep in mind that each of the 6,600 precincts in the state has a different ballot.

The MOVE Act allows states to apply for a waiver from the 45-day requirement if the state can accommodate the military and overseas voters in other ways. Because Washington does provide the same amount of time for the ballots to be sent and received, but simply provides it on an altered schedule, Washington has applied for a waiver from this very specific requirement. Washington is still providing the benefits that the MOVE Act envisions, and is even exceeding those expectations by providing 51 days of transit time for the General Election.

Waiver process was included in bipartisan MOVE Act

States' ability to request exemptions is provided for in law. The MOVE Act adopted by voice vote on July 23, 2009. Prior to the vote, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) noted the waiver provision during a Senate floor speech, saying that the bill "ensures that military and overseas voters have time to vote by requiring ballots to be sent out 45 days before the election and allowing blank ballots to be sent electronically. It also provides some flexibility to States that cannot meet the 45-day deadline, as long as they come up with an alternative plan to ensure time to vote."

26 Senate Republicans co-sponsored MOVE Act. According the Library of Congress' THOMAS website, the legislation had 59 co-sponsors, including 26 Republicans.

Cornyn: MOVE Act "balance[s] responsibilities between elections officials and the Department of Defense." Discussing an amendment to attach the MOVE Act to the Defense Appropriations bill, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said the amendment would "help us restore the franchise, the vote, to our deployed military overseas," adding, "Our goal has been to balance responsibilities between elections officials and the Department of Defense, and I believe this amendment accomplishes that goal."

Chambliss lauded passage of MOVE Act, which included waiver process. In a July 24, 2009, press release Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), said, "This is an important bill that addresses many critical quality-of-life issues for our men and women. I'm pleased an amendment to ensure that our military men and women serving overseas are able to participate in the electoral process was included in the final bill."

Fox News' America Live repeatedly hosts Lou Dobbs to mislead on immigration issues, despite his history of making false and absurd claims on the issue, such grossly overestimating the number of new leprosy cases in the U.S. and blaming that distorted figure on immigrants.

Dobbs pushed falsehood that Obama is "holding border security hostage"

Dobbs pushes Sen. Kyl's claim--which Kyl later walked back--that Obama told Kyl "he would hold border security hostage" to get comprehensive immigration reform. On the August 26 edition of America Live, Dobbs pushed the claim that "Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, remember, saying that it was very straightforward, that the President said he would hold border security hostage to so-called comprehensive immigration reform." Host Megyn Kelly had to correct Dobbs, by noting that Kyl "dialed that back later."

Burton: "The president didn't say that. Senator Kyl knows the president didn't say that." The Washington Post reported on June 21 that Kyl "said that President Obama personally told him the administration will not support stricter border enforcement until Republicans back broad immigration reform." The Post continued:

The White House strongly denied the claim.

At a town hall in Arizona on Friday, Kyl responded to a voter's question about immigration by detailing a one-on-one meeting he had with Obama. According to Kyl, "The president said the problem is if we secure the border, then you all won't have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform."

"In other words, they're holding it hostage," Kyl said at the event, a video of was circulated widely online on Monday, but not from Kyl's office. "They won't secure the border unless and until is it combined with comprehensive immigration reform."

Bill Burton, a White House spokesman, said, "The president didn't say that. Senator Kyl knows the president didn't say that."

"But what everybody knows because the President has made it perfectly clear is that what we need to do is everything that we can to bring about comprehensive immigration reform," he added. "And that includes not just securing the border, but doing a lot of other things."

Sen. Kyl had to walk back his own accusation. From a June 25 National Review Online post:

Kyl, of course, had a small spat with the White House last week over comments he made at a town-hall meeting. Kyl, responding to a voter's question, detailed a recent one-on-one conversation he had with the president. "They are holding [border security] hostage" over hopes for comprehensive immigration reform, Kyl said at the forum.

Kyl tells us that the comments were "taken a bit out of context," and that the "they" he was referring to was the Left, "the president's base," and not the administration. "I did not try to start a fight. This meeting happened a month ago and we were talking in the context of his political problems. He was talking about how they think that if we secure the border, you guys [Republicans] won't have the incentive to work on comprehensive immigration reform."

America Live regularly hosts Dobbs to mislead on immigration

Dobbs falsely claims Obama's border efforts are a "foundation" for "unconditional amnesty."  On the August 9 edition of Fox News' America Live, Dobbs called the border security bill "a modest border security piece of legislation," and claimed "it would give [the Obama administration] the foundation to say, we did something about border security...and then move ahead and have their way on the issue of unconditional amnesty." Dobbs later claimed "we are not seeing a commitment to actual detention and apprehension."

In fact, the Obama administration has increased both border security and immigration enforcement. memo to which Dobbs refers specifically recommends against deferred action, which is defined as "an exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to pursue removal from the U.S. of a particular individual for a specific period of time." The memo states that "doing so would likely be controversial, not to mention expensive," so, "Rather than making deferred action widely available to hundreds of thousands and as a non-legislative version of 'amnesty,' [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] could tailor the use of this discretionary option for particular groups such as individuals who would be eligible for relief under the DREAM Act."

Dobbs has a long history of immigration misinformation, including falsely claiming immigrants spread leprosy

Dobbs has a long history of spreading immigration misinformation and conspiracy theories. He has routinely discussed the North American Union conspiracy theory, incorrectly claimed that undocumented immigrants drain social services and don't pay taxes, and repeatedly amplified the falsehood that undocumented immigrants are disproportionately violent. He has been an unrepentant purveyor of hateful attacks, fraudulently claiming, for example, that immigrants are spreading leprosy and seek to reconquer the southwestern United States. And in 2009, he legitimized the thoroughly debunked birther conspiracy theory concerning the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate.

Dobbs resigned from CNN under pressure for his anti-immigration views. According to The New York Times: "[T]he president of CNN/U.S., Jonathan Klein, offered a choice to Lou Dobbs ... [he] could vent his opinions on radio and anchor an objective newscast on television, or he could leave CNN." As a result of pressure put on CNN by Media Matters and other Hispanic groups to drop Dobbs, he announced his departure from CNN, citing a desire to "go beyond the role here at CNN, and to engage in constructive problem solving, as well as to contribute positively to a better understanding of the great issues of our day, and to continue to do so in the most honest, and direct language possible."

* This item has been edited from its original version.

Much of Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" weekend -- and the run-up to it -- focused on one thing: Glenn Beck. Beck introduced a Beck-sanctioned clergy group that he claimed represented "180 million people," repeatedly associated himself with Martin Luther King Jr., made outlandish claims about the impact of the events, and was praised as "one of America's most trusted and honored citizens."

"As Martin Luther King said ... ": Beck's litany of self-aggrandizing claims

Beck announces the creation of his own organization of clergy members, the "Black Robe Regiment." During his August 27 "Divine Destiny" event at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., Beck said, "Tonight, you are going to witness something historic," and later added that "some of the best and bravest pastors, priests, rabbis, clerics in the country" were present at the event. He continued, "Tomorrow, we will announce the beginning of the Black Robe Regiment."

Introducing Black Robe Regiment, Beck claims that clergy in his crowd "represent 180 million people." During his August 28 "Restoring Honor" event on the National Mall, Beck said, "The Black Robe Regiment is back again today. These 240 men and women of all faiths are standing here today. ... These 240 men and women from all faiths represent thousands of clergy that we couldn't fit into this area that are amongst you now -- thousands that have come here to the Mall to stand with America and God. And those thousands that are here represent 180 million people."

Beck: "As Martin Luther King said, I don't know if I'll be there when we reach the promised land." Beck said on his August 27 radio show that "we are at the beginning of the awakening." He continued: "As Martin Luther King said, 'I don't know if I'll be there when we reach the promised land, I don't know how long it's going to take, but we are going to reach the promised land, or at least the edges of the Promised Land.' "

Beck: "I can relate to Martin Luther King probably the most." During "Restoring Honor," after reciting the names of Moses, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington, Beck said that "out of all these giants, I can relate to Martin Luther King probably the most because we haven't carved him in marble yet."

Beck: "I have been looking for the next George Washington. ... I know he is in this crowd." During "Restoring Honor," Beck said, "Somewhere in this crowd -- I know it. I have been looking for the next George Washington. I can't find him. I know he is in this crowd. He may be 8 years old, but this is the moment. This is the moment that he dedicates his life, that he sees giants around him. And 25 years from now, he will come not to this stair, but to those stairs. And he can proclaim, 'I have a new dream.' That must be our goal: to raise the next great monument."

Beck compares himself to "the man who saw the iceberg" on the Titanic. During "Restoring Honor" Beck said, "I know that many in this country think that I'm a fearmonger. It is not a label that I think applies. I do talk about frightening things. But I don't think the man who saw the iceberg as the Titanic was about to hit it and said, 'It's an iceberg,' was a fearmonger. He was warning people on the ship."

Beck at Kennedy Center: "We are 12 hours away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America." During "Divine Destiny," Beck declared: "We are 12 hours away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America. And it has nothing to do with this city or politics. It has everything to do with God Almighty."

Beck: "America today begins to turn back to God." During "Restoring Honor," Beck said, "Something beyond imagination is happening. Something that is beyond man is happening. America today begins to turn back to God."

Beck says "there won't be a dry eye in the house" during his speech "because it is so stirring." On his August 27 radio show, Beck told listeners that they "will regret not being" at the event, adding that "there won't be a dry eye in the house at the beginning of" his speech "because it is so stirring."

Beck: "God's just like given me like hints on stuff, you know, like, come on, can't you be a little more plain?" During "Divine Destiny," Beck said to conservative activist David Barton: "Maybe he does it to everybody else, but God's just like given me like hints on stuff, you know, like, come on, can't you be a little more plain? And, he just gives you hints."

"Servant of God": Beck's honorees and associates heap praise on him

Jackson: "God sent his son to this earth so that we could all gather. And I think that's the dream and the vision of Glenn Beck." During "Restoring Honor," Rev. C.L. Jackson, the recipient of the Beck-awarded "faith" medal, said, "God brought us here through this bright young -- I call him -- servant of God, son of God, Glenn Beck. ... God sent his son to this Earth so that we could all gather. And I think that's the dream and the vision of Glenn Beck.

Huntsman: Beck is "one of America's most trusted and honored citizens." During "Restoring Honor," a medal honoring charity was awarded to businessman Jon Huntsman Sr. Emma Houston, a woman who was treated for cancer at Huntsman's namesake cancer institute, accepted it on his behalf. After saying, "May I quote him exactly," she said, "Glenn Beck is one of America's most trusted and honored citizens. I am grateful to him for presenting to me, through Emma Houston, this award for charity."

Gray: Beck is "America's history professor." At "Divine Destiny," Pat Gray, co-host of Beck's radio show, said about Beck, "You know him as, as someone described to me in line at the National Archive today, 'America's history professor,' someone who tells the truth about what's going on in America today," adding, "I know him as someone who cares so deeply about America that he loses sleep nightly. ... He is a man who now loves people with all his heart and loves the Lord with all his heart, might, mind, and spirit. I know him as a man -- and so do you -- as a man who works tirelessly fighting for this country."

Alveda King thanks Beck for using "his popularity and influence to bring us together." During "Restoring Honor," Alveda King, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece, said, "It's absolutely wonderful for Glenn to use his popularity and influence to bring us together to focus not on an election or political cause, but to focus on honor and on the content of our character, and not the color of our skin. God bless you, Glenn."

Beck associates himself with the divine

Beck: 9-11 was a "wake-up call" from God. During "Restoring Honor," Beck said, "The Lord will always send a people wake-up calls. And he has been sending us wake-up call, after wake-up call, after a wake-up call. ... [Y]ou can send two kinds of wake-up calls. One through fear, like 9-11. 9-11 woke us up, and we stood shoulder-to-shoulder for a very short period of time."

Beck's "message to you" at Kennedy Center: "Trust in the Lord. If he tells you to do it, do it." During "Divine Destiny," Beck said: "My message to you tonight is: Stand where He wants you stand, and trust in the Lord. If He tells you to do it, do it. If you can't figure it out, He will. Just do it."

Beck embraces statement that "this is the beginning of the end of darkness." During "Divine Destiny," Beck said that earlier, he asked Alveda King, "Can you feel it?" Beck added, "And she said, 'Yes, I can. This is the beginning of the end of darkness. We have been in darkness for a long time.' "

Beck promoted event with weeks of self-aggrandizement

Promotional video compares 8-28 to moon landing, Iwo Jima, signing of Declaration. In a video posted on a "Producers' Blog" at his website, Beck placed "Restoring Honor" in the context of the moon landing, the Montgomery bus boycott, Iwo Jima, the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and other landmark historical events. It also suggested that Beck is following in the tradition of Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, most of the Founding Fathers, Martha Washington, the Wright Brothers, and other notable historical figures. The video was also shown at "Restoring Honor" itself.

The "spirit of God unleashed": Beck claims divine influence over his event. In the days and weeks leading up to the weekend of 8-28, Beck repeatedly promoted the idea that God was directly involved in the weekend's events. He predicted "a miracle" would occur at the event, said that attendees would "see the spirit of God unleashed," and claimed the rally will produce an "awakening."

"American miracle": Beck's outrageous predictions for his "historic" 8-28 rally. Beck promoted his rally with outrageous hyperbole, calling it everything from "an American miracle" to a "defibrillator to the heart of America." Beck also claimed that with the rally, he and his audience would be able to "reclaim" the "distorted" civil rights movement.

Fox News falsely reported that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has instituted a new policy of only deporting unauthorized immigrants who have committed serious crimes. In fact, DHS continues to deport those who have not committed crimes, but, in an effort improve the efficiency of the removal system, the agency will dismiss cases against certain individuals who have pending visa applications and are likely to receive those visas under current law.

Fox falsely reports that new ICE policy gives unauthorized immigrants "free pass" if they "don't have a criminal record"

Fox & Friends mischaracterizes new policy: "[T]hey're not going to" deport people "if you don't have a criminal record." On the August 26 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, guest-host Alisyn Camarota falsely suggested that the new policy means "that if it is a noncriminal case, a nonfelony case," the case will be dismissed "rather than moving forward with deportation." Co-host Steve Doocy also falsely claimed that "if a person does not have a criminal record and has been in this country two years or longer, essentially they get to stay and are not deported." Doocy also said:

DOOCY: It looks like this could be a backdoor way toward amnesty for thousands of people. But what is ultimately the message here? Hey come on in, come on in, live in the country illegally because even if you are arrested, and the threat of deportation -- they're not going to do it if you don't have a criminal record.

Gregg Jarrett falsely suggests "only illegals who are terrorists, or murderers, or criminals will be prosecuted and deported." During the August 26 edition of Fox News' America Live, correspondent Gregg Jarrett falsely suggested that the new policy means "only illegals who are terrorists, or murderers, or criminals will be prosecuted and deported":

JARRETT: Meg, there is allegedly this memo from an Assistant Secretary at ICE, which sets forth this brand new rule. If you're here illegally, but you haven't committed any serious crimes, well, your deportation case may be dismissed. We haven't confirmed it, and ICE won't deny it on the record. But if true, this would appear to be de facto amnesty. Now, the Department of Homeland Security is reviewing thousands of cases, and the Houston Chronicle and a television station in Houston both reporting that DHS is moving to dismiss some cases against illegals who have no serious criminal records. So, instead of deporting illegals, as the law demands, they would get to stay here, free and clear. An immigration lawyer says he's familiar with that memo.

CURTWRIGHT: (video clip) This is going to allow the Department of Homeland Security to focus upon people who we want them to focus upon; criminals, terrorists, not family members, not people who have been here for a very long period of time.

JARRETT: Yeah, but the law doesn't say that. It doesn't say that only illegals who are terrorists, or murderers, or criminals will be prosecuted and deported. So, critics are calling this a concerted effort by the feds to circumvent the law and create a back door amnesty program. US Senator John Cornyn thinks it's wrong.

The following day, Jarrett did another report on America Live after reading the memo, which he had suggested had been unavailable the day before, and noted that it is limited to those with pending applications with USCIS. According to the ICE website, the memo has been posted online since at least August 24.

Kelly forwards claim that government is "going to pursue only the criminals." During the August 26 edition of Fox News' America Live, host Megyn Kelly stated: "There are brand new developments right now on claims that the Immigration and Customs Department is starting to grant amnesty--right now--to thousands of illegals who are currently facing possible deportation." Kelly also said, "The allegation today, which is new, is those cases are now being dropped, because ICE has chosen not to pursue them and instead is going to pursue only the criminals, the so-called criminals who are in custody, right?" In a later segment, Kelly suggested that people are getting "a free pass" if they have "been here two years" and "didn't commit any crimes":

KELLY: According to the Houston reports, all right, the Houston Chronicle and the other local TV reports down there, the deal is if you've been in the country illegally more than two years and you don't have a criminal record--these are folks who are already in custody, who had deportation cases against them--ICE is looking at it and saying, well that guy's been here two years and he didn't commit any crimes, so, he gets a free pass.

Dobbs: "This is a de facto surrender of national sovereignty." Appearing on America Live to discuss the new policy, Lou Dobbs stated, "This is a de facto amnesty program. It is a refusal, just as John Morton, the Director of ICE said he would, to not enforce laws, immigration laws, but to do so only selectively and in his judgment as to what is appropriate. This is, I'm afraid, more than de facto amnesty, this is a de facto surrender of national sovereignty. It should be truly troubling to every American citizen."

In fact, policy applies to those likely to have visa applications approved, not all non-criminal unauthorized immigrants

New policy designed to improve efficiency of removal system. An August 20 Immigrations and Customs Enforcement memo, outlines a new policy designed "to address a major inefficiency in present practice and thereby avoid unnecessary delay and expenditure of resources." The memo states that when an unauthorized immigrant has a pending petition with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for legal status, "this fact tended to promote delays in removal proceedings." This is because immigration court judges will postpone court dates if USCIS has not made a decision on the pending application and once the visa is granted by U.S. Citizen and Immigration services (USCIS), the judge will rule against deportation, a DHS official contacted by Media Matters said. The policy is designed to help the government avoid spending extra resources on cases that were never going to end in deportation anyway and instead hasten the removal of those who could pose a danger to public safety, according to the official.

Policy directs ICE attorneys to dismiss cases for certain individuals who will probably be permitted to stay in the U.S. The memo states that cases should be dismissed if "there is an underlying application or petition" for legal status with USCIS and ICE determines that they "appear eligible for relief for removal." The memo provides the following standards for dismissal:

Only removal cases that meet the following criteria will be considered for dismissal:

• The alien must be the subject of an application or petition filed with USCIS to include a current priority date, if required, for adjustment of status;

• The alien appears eligible for relief as a matter of law and in the exercise of discretion;

• The alien must present a completed Application 10 Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form 1-485), if required; and

• The alien beneficiary must be statutorily eligible for adjustment of status (a waiver must be available for any ground of inadmissibility).

An alien in removal proceedings may appear eligible for relief but for a variety of reasons, ICE may oppose relief on the basis of discretion. In those cases, ICE should continue prosecution of the ease before EOIR regardless of whether USCIS has approved the underlying application or petition.

Those who have committed serious crimes or entered the country illegally are not eligible for green cards and would therefore not have their cases dismissed under the new policy.

AILA president: The policy "affects only people who can immigrate legally under existing laws." David Leopold, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told Media Matters that the memo "affects only foreign nationals in deportation proceedings who are the beneficiaries of immigrant visa petitions, which, when processed, will give them an immediate right to file for a green card. Stated differently, the memo affects only people who can immigrate legally under existing laws--meaning they have otherwise played by the rules and waited their turn for a visa."

DHS official: ICE will re-file deportation case if the visa is rejected. According to a DHS official contacted by Media Matters, immigrants with pending applications for legal status who have their removal proceedings dismissed by ICE will have their deportation cases re-filed if USCIS rejects their visa application. Indeed, the memo states that the dismissals will be made "without prejudice," meaning that ICE is free to subsequently pursue the removal case.

Policy is part of effort to expedite removal of those with criminal records. The Houston Chronicle reported that DHS is reviewing cases with pending court dates for those that could be considered for dismissal. The article stated, "Richard Rocha, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman, said Tuesday that the review is part of the agency's broader, nationwide strategy to prioritize the deportations of illegal immigrants who pose a threat to national security and public safety." The immigration courts are currently facing a massive backlog with around 250,000 pending cases in June and an average waiting time of 459 days, according to Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.

David Leopold of AILA also stated that "this memo, if implemented across the US, could go a long way toward reducing the tremendous backlogs that plague the immigration courts, and relieving overcrowding in the vast ICE detention system. The memo represents an attempted efficient use of scarce law enforcement resources so the government can target violent criminals and terrorists."

NY Times: Policy applies to those with "active applications in the system to become legal residents." The New York Times reported on August 26:

Mr. Morton's memorandum refers to a particular group of illegal immigrants: those who have been detained in ICE operations because they did not have legal status, but who have active applications in the system to become legal residents. The memo encourages ICE officers and lawyers to use their authority to dismiss those cases, canceling the deportation proceedings, if they determine that the immigrants have no criminal records and stand a strong chance of having their residence applications approved.

The policy is intended to address a "major inefficiency" that has led to an unnecessary pileup of cases in the immigration courts, Mr. Morton said. The courts have reported at least 17,000 cases that could be eliminated from their docket if ICE dismissed deportations of immigrants, like those married to United States citizens, who were very likely to win legal status, the memo says.

Dismissal does not grant legal status or "amnesty." Immigration attorneys reportedly explained that these dismissals do not "grant any form of legal status," contrary to the claim that the action represents "amnesty," a term conservative media frequently use to describe legislative proposals that would grant legal status to unauthorized immigrants who meet certain conditions. USCIS, not ICE, determines whether to grant the visa. The Times reported that Mary Meg McCarthy, director of the National Immigrant Justice Center, stated: "This is for people who do have a path to legalize their status ... This does not create a new path to legalization for anyone."

DHS deporting record numbers of unauthorized immigrants

Wash. Post: "Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants." The Washington Post reported on July 26 that "removals reached a record high in 2009" and "the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007." Data from ICE show that the agency has removed more criminal immigrants from the U.S. in 2010 than any previous year:

Glenn Beck has repeatedly promoted the idea that God is directly involved in his August 28 rally. He has predicted "a miracle" will occur at the event, said that attendees will "see the spirit of God unleashed," and claimed the rally will produce an "awakening."

8-28 attendees will "see the spirit of God unleashed"

At 8-28, "You're going to see the spirit of God unleashed." On the August 26 edition of his radio show, Beck told his audience, "You're going to see the spirit of God unleashed, unlike you have probably ever seen it before, at least at a public function. You are going to see the power of God."

Beck is "only writing a few bullet points" for speech in case "the spirit" wants to talk. On the August 25 edition of his radio show Beck said, "I am only writing a few bullet points" for his 8-28 speech "so that I don't get in the way of the spirit in case he wants to talk."

Favorable 8-28 weather forecast means "God is smiling". On the August 25 edition of his Fox News show, Beck said, "By the way the weather here in Washington is incredible. And it is supposed to be sunny, pleasant, low humidity. I mean, dare I say it? God is smiling."

"The secret" to 8-28 rally is "God". On the August 26 edition of his Fox News show, Beck said that he's talked about "Saturday's message" for "six months on one of the biggest cable news shows in history and the third largest radio show in America." He continued, "Just between us. Don't tell anyone in the media. The secret is God."

8-28 involves "divine providence"

"Divine providence" led to rally's scheduling on day of MLK speech. On the June 18 edition of his radio show Beck said, "It is the anniversary of the 'I have a dream' speech, from Martin Luther King. And, what an appropriate day. At first we picked that date and we didn't know, and I thought 'oh, geez.' But now, now I almost think it was divine providence."

"Ask [God] for his divine providence" and for "the finger of the Lord to appear." On the July 7 edition of his radio show Beck said, "Washington, D.C. August 28, I ask for your continued prayers. And I... God knows what I'm talking about. Ask him for - ask him for his divine providence and the finger of the lord to appear." He continued, "It is only through divine providence, it is really only through divine providence that this is happening so far."

"I was told to stand where I'm standing." On his August 27 radio show Beck stated: "I'm sorry for the things that I have done that have caused me to be such an imperfect messenger, but I was told to stand where I'm standing. God doesn't promise protection for anything. He doesn't promise me protection for my wealth, for my house, for my body. He doesn't promise anything. He promises me the only thing of value:protection for our souls. But that requires you to do the best that you can. And that's all I'm doing."

8-28 is "the beginning of an awakening"

"We are at the beginning of the awakening." On the August 27 edition of his radio show, Glenn Beck claimed that "we are at the beginning of the awakening. This is a profound moment. This is it. Tomorrow is a step in that. It's not the beginning, it's not the end, its just part of it. You are at the awakening. This is fantastic."

"Pray for the spirit to be in that area unbridled," "this is an awakening." On the August 27 edition of his radio show Beck told a caller "You pray for the spirit to be in that area unbridled. You pray that the people that attend understand that this is a sacred space and that this is an awakening. That it's not a -- it's not atea party rally or anything else. You pray for a veil of protection of both body and spirit on that. And if you would, personally, pray if I would have the ears to hear exactly what I'm supposed to say tomorrow and that I just might just be in the place to where I would say those things."

"A miracle" will occur on 8-28

"I expect a miracle on 8-28." On his July 22 radio show, Beck said "I expect a miracle on 8-28. Witness it with me. Make history."

Beck: "What is going to happen on 8-28 will be a miracle." On his television show on August 11, Beck claimed that "what is going to happen on 8-28 will be a miracle." Beck told his viewers that he is "filled with great hope because I remember, not what I've said to you, but what I know to be true. I've said for some time now, expect miracles." He also told his listeners: "Literally, expect to see miracles. Great, powerful miracles are coming."

Beck asks listeners to "be a part of an American miracle" on 8-28. On the August 23 edition of his radio show, Beck encouraged his listeners to attend his Restoring Honor rally by asking them to "be a part of an American miracle." Beck appealed to his listeners by saying: "Please, if you are not thinking of coming to 8-28, or there's some reason, you're thinking, 'Oh I'm not really sure' -- something miraculous is going to happen on Saturday."

Beck says that "something miraculous is going to happen" at his 8-28 rally. On the August 16 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that he doesn't "know how many people will come" but that "something miraculous is going to happen." Beck suggested that "your life, your fortune, and your country are at stake." He further stated that "if the people show up, I think it's going to provide a shockwave to this nation." Beck told his listeners they need to "return to God, or we are going to be buried in the rubble of history."

There's only one person who might know what's going to happen on Saturday, August 28 in front of the Lincoln Memorial -- Glenn Beck -- and there's a good chance even he's not sure. Beck's "Restoring Honor" event has gone through so many different changes that it's impossible to nail down what will or won't be included. First it was an educational seminar, then it was a political rally, then it was a book release party, then it was a veterans benefit, then it was a civil rights rally, then it was a celebration of Martin Luther King, then it was a religious revival, then it was all of the above, none of the above, and some of the above all at once.

And Beck is keeping everyone guessing by contradicting himself all over the place. On the radio this week Beck said that even though the event will be held on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of King's "I Have A Dream" speech at the same spot, he is "not trying to be Martin Luther King." That statement, however, was incongruous with his many, many, many, many, many previous self-comparisons to King. It also didn't help that later in the same show, Beck channeled King's final sermon in telling the prospective rally attendees that "you may not make it to the mountaintop."

But there has been one unifying theme in Beck's relentless promotion of the event: history. Specifically, Beck wants you to believe that his rally will be an event of such historical magnitude that decades from now our progeny will look upon it as the moment America did that thing that put it back on the right course, or something. We will all see a "miracle" on August 28, Beck insists, even though miracles, by definition, can't be scheduled ahead of time. It will be, says Beck, an experience that will "change the world."

Whatever.

Those looking for a miracle will almost certainly be disappointed, as will anyone earnestly expecting to forward the struggle for civil rights or find spiritual enlightenment. What they will get, more than likely, is a standard-fare series of attacks on the evils of liberals and progressivism interspersed with celebrations of America's veterans and fighting men and women. (He insists the rally will be apolitical, even though it's supported by conservative groups, boasts Republican members of Congress as fundraisers, and features Sarah Palin as a keynote speaker.) And there's good reason to suspect that Beck would use a celebration of America's military as a vehicle to promote himself and his ideology. He's done it before.

Alexander Zaitchik's Common Nonsense describes Beck's 2003 pro-Iraq war "Rallies for America," and the similarities to "Restoring Honor" are too great to ignore: "Flags, soldiers, and oaths to God, leader, and country dominated Beck's rallies, just as they did the political theater of Nazi Germany. The Rally for America also featured speakers who made threats against the Left, echoing the threats of violence that were routinely heard on Beck's radio show. Although Beck made much of keeping politicians out of his spotlight, some rallies featured Jumbotronic messages from President Bush, whom Beck declared in need of his nation's prayers."

And the whole idea of "Restoring Honor" is making a lot of people very uncomfortable, even in some unlikely corners. Beck's Fox News colleague Greta Van Susteren thinks Beck is wrong to have the event at the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of King's speech, and Fox News insists that it has absolutely nothing to do with the rally and will only cover it as a "news event." Of course, Fox has also givenBeck a huge platform to promote the rally, but consistency was never its strong suit anyway. Even conservative activists are casting a leery eye on Beck's rally, suspecting that Beck's in it for himself and not the cause.

So one can't help but believe that all the grandiose statements of historical relevance and civic health are merely cover for the fact that 8-28 is all about Beck. It's all about selling the Glenn Beck brand and the Glenn Beck books and the Glenn Beck style, and it's a rather audacious sales pitch. You would have to be audacious to take up the mantle of Martin Luther King when you despise pretty much everything he stood for. You'd have to be audacious to claim the rally is about "civil rights" when you've built your career by exploiting racial tensions and are currently under an advertiser boycott for calling the first African American president a racist who hates white people. Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" is a cynical ploy that exploits the hopes, fears, and faiths of his followers, a "sick farce" in which Beck is trying to advance his own politics and ambitions while hiding behind "deranged posturing."

And the build-up this week has featured all the usual trappings of a Beck narcissism-fest -- grossly revisionist historical accounts; prophecies of impending doom; and Beck playing the divinely ordained role of spiritual savior (Glenn Beck is my shepherd, I shall not want). Of course, salvation isn't cheap. It requires a deep spiritual commitment, a willingness to ask tough questions about yourself, and $6.95 to view the livestream of "Glenn Beck's Divine Destiny" (presented by Glenn Beck), the 8-28 prologue/religious revival which Beck promises will "heal your soul." And since you're already at Beck's website, why not shell out a few extra bucks for classes at Beck University and the right-wing history books he promotes?

After all, Beck just wants you to be a better person -- for a nominal fee, of course.

Muslim until proven Christian

Is Barack Obama a Muslim?

No.

He's a Christian. Nevertheless, that question has been a background whisper to the right-wing narrative about Barack Obama even before he became a candidate for president -- Obama made his announcement almost a month after the false InsightMag.com report that he attended an Indonesian madrassa as a child.

That whisper became more of a shout in the past week after some thoroughly depressing polling was released showing that disproportionately large percentages of the American public either believe (contrary to established fact) that the president is a Muslim, or are unsure (in spite of intense media scrutiny) of which faith he adheres. This can't be seen as anything but a huge victory for the right, which has, for the better part of three years, made sure to take every opportunity to use "Obama" and "Islam" in the same sentence. Sometimes it's more explicit, like when Franklin Graham proclaims that Obama was "born a Muslim." Other times it's slightly less explicit, like when the Washington Times' Jeffrey Kuhner -- who was editor of InsightMag.com when it made the false Obama-madrassa claim -- callsObama a "cultural Muslim" and the Times Photoshops a star and crescent onto his face.

Either way, the end goal is the same -- to portray Obama as different, dangerous, "other."

Given that they've worked so hard at fostering this image, one would think that the release of polling showing that more and more Americans buy into their bogus storyline would be cause for celebration. That, however, is not the case, as the right is eager to disown responsibility for this bigoted line of attack and place it squarely on Obama's shoulders.

Stephen Hayes suspects that the Muslim rumor persists because of Obama's "outreach to what he calls the Muslim world." Rush Limbaugh claims Obama hasn't been "obvious" about his Christianity, while Glenn Beck faults the president for practicing "a Christianity that most Americans just don't recognize." Byron York wrote a blame-the-victim masterpiece for the Washington Examiner in which he traced responsibility for the Muslim falsehood all the way to Obama's memoir, Dreams from My Father.

The logic is amusing -- the default setting for most people is to think Obama is a scary Muslim, and it's his responsibility to convince them otherwise. In practice, the argument is devious. These right-wingers give the appearance that they're rebutting the false Muslim rumor, but at the same time forward it by attacking Obama for doing things that make him seem like a Muslim. They absolve themselves of responsibility while reaping the benefits of smearing their ideological adversary.

But it's not just the president who's getting a bad shake. Implicit in this smear is that being a Muslim is an undesirable trait, something to be feared and loathed. And that has the potential to make difficult the lives of American Muslims.

One need not look any further than the ongoing, increasingly ludicrous row over the Park51 Islamic center -- currently suffering under the ignominious "Ground Zero mosque" misnomer. After weeks of Fox News and the rest of the right-wing media blithely lumping Muslims together with terrorists, Nazis, and enemies of the state, the protests against Park51 have taken on a virulently xenophobic character, with protesters holding signs with slogans like: "Islam = Hate"; "Islam = terrorist"; "Islam = Killing."

But if we're going by the right wing's rules, then that's the fault of Muslims for not sufficiently proving they're not all hateful, murdering terrorists.

Simon Maloy is a Research Fellow at Media Matters for America.

Right-wing media are falsely claiming that Obama "deliberately wrote off" 23,000 workers "in pursuit of its junk science-based [oil] drilling moratorium."  In fact, as The New York Times reports, the predicted job losses due to the moratorium have "failed to materialize."

Right-wing media: Obama "deliberately wrote off" 23,000 workers "in pursuit of its junk science-based [oil] drilling moratorium"

Malkin: Obama "deliberately wrote off" the 23,000 drilling jobs "in pursuit of its junk science-based [oil] drilling moratorium."  In an August 25 column, Michelle Malkin cited the "estimated 23,000 workers in the deepwater drilling industry whom the White House deliberately wrote off in pursuit of its junk science-based drilling moratorium," as evidence of a "White House war on jobs."

Wash. Times op-ed: "Oil workers get drilled."  In an August 25 Washington Times column titled "Oil workers get drilled: President's moratorium contributes to Gulf economic disaster," Frank Perley claimed: "Job losses of about 23,000 are expected during the six-month ban," but made no mention of the fact those losses have reportedly "fail[ed] to materialize." From the column:

Job losses of about 23,000 are expected during the six-month ban, according to a memo by federal drilling regulator Michael Bromwich obtained by the Wall Street Journal. At least 9,450 of those are oil-drilling-company employees. BP has pledged $100 million to compensate those workers, but an estimated 14,000 additional jobs serving the oil industry are likely to disappear by the Nov. 30 expiration of the ban. Businesses such as drilling-equipment manufacturers and charter-boat operations that ferry supplies to the rigs are severely impacted by the moratorium. Providing assistance to those businesses would constitute an admission that Team Obama is contributing to economic devastation in the Gulf. So those folks, evidently, are out of luck.

NY Times: "Job Losses Over Drilling Ban Fail to Materialize"

NYT: Estimates of job losses, such as "the government's estimate of the drilling pause" to result in "23,000 lost jobs" are proving to be "too pessimistic." In a August 24 article, the New York Times reported that after "the Obama administration called a halt to virtually all deepwater drilling activity in the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon blowout and fire in April, oil executives, economists and local officials complained that the six-month moratorium would cost thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in lost revenue." The Times added:

Yet the worst of those forecasts has failed to materialize, as companies wait to see how long the moratorium will last before making critical decisions on spending cuts and layoffs. Unemployment claims related to the oil industry along the Gulf Coast have been in the hundreds, not the thousands, and while oil production from the gulf is down because of the drilling halt, supplies from the region are expected to rebound in future years. Only 2 of the 33 deepwater rigs operating in the gulf before the BP rig exploded have left for other fields.

While it is too early to gauge the long-term environmental or economic effects of the release of 4.9 million barrels of oil into the gulf, it now appears that the direst predictions about the moratorium will not be borne out. Even the government's estimate of the impact of the drilling pause -- 23,000 lost jobs and $10.2 billion in economic damage -- is proving to be too pessimistic.

NYT: "There are several reasons the suspension has not cut as deeply as anticipated," such as oil companies using suspension to upgrade drilling equipment and shifting operations to onshore wells. The Times reported:

There are several reasons the suspension has not cut as deeply as anticipated.

Oil companies used the enforced suspension to service and upgrade their drilling equipment, keeping shipyards and service companies busy. Drilling firms have kept most of their workers, knowing that if they let them go it will be hard to field experienced teams when the moratorium is lifted. Oil companies have shifted operations to onshore wells, saving industry jobs.

And the administration has dropped repeated hints that the offshore drilling ban will be eased or removed before it is set to expire on Nov. 30.

In recent days, right-wing media have dismissed the idea of a nationwide "Islamophobia." In fact, there has been a well-documented trend of "Islamophobia" throughout the country in the wake of the right wing's extreme anti-Muslim rhetoric over the planned Islamic community center in Manhattan.

Ignoring recent anti-Muslim incidents, right-wing media dismiss nationwide trend of "Islamophobia"

Jonah Goldberg: "There isn't an anti-Muslim climate." In an August 26 column, titled, "The Islamophobia myth," Jonah Goldberg addressed a recent attack on a Muslim cab driver in New York City and wrote: "It's unavoidable that many will cite this as proof of the national wave of 'Islamophobia,' touted by Time magazine and other media outlets. We'll have to wait for the facts, but even if the allegations prove true, one assault doesn't a national trend make." Goldberg further asserted, "There isn't an anti-Muslim climate."

NY Post: "Certainly, there is no cresting wave of bigotry about to roll over Muslims in America." In an August 26 editorial, the New York Post also addressed the attack and stated, "[S]o far there is scant evidence of broad, anti-Islamic attacks." The Post later added: "Certainly, there is no cresting wave of bigotry about to roll over Muslims in America: There are now slightly more than 100 such attacks each year -- this in a nation of 310-plus million people."

However, mosques throughout U.S. have recently suffered vandalism

Vandalism at California mosque reportedly investigated as a hate crime; vandalism made reference to "Temple for the God of terrorism at Ground Zero." An August 25 Fresno Bee article reported that "[v]andalism to a Madera Islamic center and signs found on the property are being investigated as a hate crime." The article stated that a brick was thrown through a window and that signs reading, "No Temple for the God of terrorism at Ground Zero. ANB"; "Wake up America, the Enemy is here. ANB"; and "American Nationalist Brotherhood" were found at the mosque.

AP: "Foes of proposed mosques have deployed dogs to intimidate Muslims holding prayer." On August 8, The Associated Press reported on incidents of anti-Muslim vandalism in Tennessee and California, noting that "[f]oes of proposed mosques have deployed dogs to intimidate Muslims holding prayer services and spray painted 'Not Welcome' on a construction sign, then later ripped it apart." The AP further reported:

The 13-story, $100 million Islamic center that could soon rise two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11 attacks would dwarf the proposals elsewhere, yet the smaller projects in local communities are stoking a sharper kind of fear and anger than has showed up in New York.

In the Nashville suburb of Murfreesboro, opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer. They are afraid the 15-acre site that was once farmland will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government.

"They are not a religion. They are a political, militaristic group," said Bob Shelton, a 76-year-old retiree who lives in the area.

Shelton was among several hundred demonstrators recently who wore "Vote for Jesus" T-shirts and carried signs that said: "No Sharia law for USA!," referring to the Islamic code of law. Others took their opposition further, spray painting the sign announcing the "Future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro" and tearing it up.

In Temecula, Calif., opponents brought dogs to protest a proposed 25,000-square-foot mosque that would sit on four acres next to a Baptist church. Opponents worry it will turn the town into haven for Islamic extremists, but mosque leaders say they are peaceful and just need more room to serve members.

Anti-Islam graffiti found at Texas mosque, and is reportedly thought to be related to Park51 protests. According to a local WFAA News 8 report, vandals spray-painted "[s]tick-figure graffiti ... depicting Uncle Sam sexually assaulting Allah" on the parking lot of a mosque in Arlington, Texas. The report also noted that a playground behind the mosque was set on fire, and quoted the mosque's president, Jamal Qaddura, as saying that "whoever did this might also have tried to burn the mosque itself by pulling apart old gas lines." Qaddura also said "that he believes the damage may be linked to resentment over a planned Islamic community center near Ground Zero in Manhattan."

Islamic Center of Northeast Florida was firebombed. Jacksonville, Florida's, First Coast News reported that on May 10, a man attempted to firebomb the Islamic Center of Northeast Florida "shortly before evening prayers." The Florida Times-Union later reported that "[a]uthorities found remnants of a crude pipe bomb in the explosion" and that "at the time of the blast about 60 people were inside." The article quoted FBI Special Agent-in-Charge Jim Casey as discussing the potential destruction and death the blast could have caused were it not for "the strength of the mosque building." The article also reported that "law enforcement officials" were surprised that "they had not gotten nearly as many calls as they expected" regarding the identity of the bomber after they released security video of the man. From The Florida Times-Union:

A day after releasing security video of the man suspected of firebombing a Jacksonville mosque, law enforcement officials acknowledged they had not gotten nearly as many calls as they expected.

"Someone out there knows who this person is," said FBI Special Agent-in-Charge Jim Casey of Jacksonville office. "Anyone who recognizes this individual needs to contact us."

[...]

This was not a harmless prank," Casey said. "We found shrapnel from the blast a hundred yards away close to [Florida] 9A."

At the time of the blast about 60 people were inside. The firebomb caused minor damage to the building. There were no injuries.

Casey said the minor damage was primarily due to the strength of the mosque building. If anyone had been closer to the blast, they would have been injured or killed, he said.

Florida church plans to burn copies of the Quran on 9-11. The Gainesvlle Sun reported on August 18 that the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, plans to "set fire to copies of the Quran on Sept. 11." The New York Times reported that Terry Jones, a pastor at the church, posted a sign at the church last year that stated, "Islam is of the devil."

In wake of Park51 controversy, protests of local mosques have occurred nationwide

Staten Island, NY: "Muslim groups have encountered unexpectedly intense opposition to their plans for opening mosques in Lower Manhattan, in Brooklyn and most recently in an empty convent on Staten Island." A June 10 New York Times article reported on opposition to a proposed mosque in Staten Island, New York, that "have focused overwhelmingly on more intangible and volatile issues: fear of terrorism, distrust of Islam and a linkage of the two in opponents' minds." From The New York Times article:

Some opponents have cited traffic and parking concerns. But the objections have focused overwhelmingly on more intangible and volatile issues: fear of terrorism, distrust of Islam and a linkage of the two in opponents' minds.

''Wouldn't you agree that every terrorist, past and present, has come out of a mosque?'' asked one woman who stood up Wednesday night during a civic association meeting on Staten Island to address representatives of a group that wants to convert a Roman Catholic convent into a mosque in the Midland Beach neighborhood.

''No,'' began Ayman Hammous, president of the Staten Island branch of the group, the Muslim American Society -- though the rest of his answer was drowned out by catcalls and boos from among the 400 people who packed the gymnasium of a community center.

[...]

''We are newcomers, and newcomers in America have always had to prove their loyalty,'' said Mahdi Bray, the society's executive director. ''It's an old story. You have to have thick skin.''

That admonition was tested on Wednesday, as irate residents took turns at the microphone, demanding answers from the three Muslim men who had accepted the get-acquainted invitation of the civic association.

''I was on the phone this morning with the F.B.I., and all I want to know from you is why MAS is on the terrorist watch list,'' said Joan Moriello, using the acronym for the Muslim American Society. Her question produced a loud, angry noise from the audience.

Mr. Hammous, a physical therapist who lives on Staten Island, exchanged a puzzled look with two other Muslim men who had joined him on the podium, both officers of the society's Brooklyn branch, which operates a mosque in Bensonhurst and faces opposition to opening another in Sheepshead Bay.

''Your information is incorrect, madam,'' he replied. ''We are not on any watch list.'' The other men, Mohamed Sadeia and Abdel Hafid Djamil, shook their heads in agreement.

The State Department maintains a terrorist watch list for foreign organizations, and the Justice Department has identified domestic groups it considers unindicted co-conspirators in various terror-related prosecutions. The American Muslim Society is on neither of those lists.

Murfreesboro, TN: Mosque opponents are afraid the mosque "will be turned into a terrorist training ground." An August 8 AP article reported on the protests surrounding a proposed Islamic center in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, by noting that "opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer. They are afraid the 15-acre site that was once farmland will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government." From the AP:

In the Nashville suburb of Murfreesboro, opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer. They are afraid the 15-acre site that was once farmland will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government.

"They are not a religion. They are a political, militaristic group," said Bob Shelton, a 76-year-old retiree who lives in the area.

Shelton was among several hundred demonstrators recently who wore "Vote for Jesus" T-shirts and carried signs that said: "No Sharia law for USA!," referring to the Islamic code of law. Others took their opposition further, spray painting the sign announcing the "Future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro" and tearing it up.

Temecula, CA: "Foes of proposed mosques have deployed dogs to intimidate Muslims holding prayer services and spray painted 'Not Welcome' on a construction sign." The AP also reported, "In Temecula, Calif., opponents brought dogs to protest a proposed 25,000-square-foot mosque that would sit on four acres next to a Baptist church. Opponents worry it will turn the town into haven for Islamic extremists, but mosque leaders say they are peaceful and just need more room to serve members." An August 19 Christian Science Monitor article further reported:

Protesters with bullhorns have shown up during afternoon prayers at the Islamic Center of Temecula Valley in California.

The Muslim group there hopes to erect a 24,000 square foot mosque and Islamic center on some vacant land it owns.

The protesters were mainly concerned about Islam, carrying such signs as "No Allah Law Here."

The mosque has also been criticized by Bill Rench, pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, which would be the mosque's neighbor. Mr. Rench has told the Monitor in the past, "We don't want to do anything that encourages Islam."

But the imam of the mosque, who has the support of a local interfaith council, has tried to mend fences with Rench, offering to explain Islam. "I would like to have a meeting with the pastor," Imam Mahmoud Harmoush told the Monitor earlier.

So far, mosque officials say that effort has not been successful.

Officials hope to complete the mosque at the end of next year.

Florence, KY: "Stop the Mosque," and "the takeover of our country." The Courier-Journal (Louisville, Kentucky) reported in an August 16 article that a planned mosque in Florence, Kentucky, has drawn protests. From the article:

Florence city officials say they have gotten several calls about the proposed worship center and a flier is being distributed in the city's neighborhoods.

There is also a website run by a Boone County resident that posts anti-Islamic messages and encourages people to "Stop the Mosque."

[...]

"Cayton Road is in your neighborhood," the flier states. "Everyone needs to contact Florence City Council to have this stopped. Americans need to stop the takeover of our country."

Protesters at Connecticut mosque reportedly chanted "hate-filled slogans." An August 9 New Haven Register article reported that "Connecticut Muslim leaders are urging public officials and police to assure they can worship without being harassed after members of a Dallas-based group showed up outside a Bridgeport mosque Friday chanting what have been described as hate-filled slogans." The article further reported:

The organization involved in the Bridgeport incident, Operation Save America, is primarily an anti-abortion group that was once known as Operation Rescue.

But members of the group stood outside the mosque as worshippers prepared for the upcoming observance of Ramadan, according to Mongi Dhaouadi, executive director of Connecticut office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and chanted hate-filled slogans. Dhaouadi said the protesters said things like, "Islam is a lie" and "Jesus hates Muslims."

Anti-Park51 protests have been full of right-wing hate

Anti-Park51 protesters harass African-American man at Park51 protest. The Huffington Post noted on August 23 that "opponents of a proposed Islamic center near Ground Zero accosted a black man who tried to navigate through a crowd of anti-mosque protesters." The Huffington Post included video of the incident.

AP reports on anti-Muslim rhetoric at Park51 protest, including protesters who believe Sharia law to be based in violence and that the organizers behind Park51 are "the same people who took down the twin towers." An August 23 Associated Press article on an anti-Park51 which occurred that day, reported:

Signs hoisted by dozens of protesters standing behind police barricades read "SHARIA" -- using dripping, blood-red letters to describe Islam's Shariah law, which governs the behavior of Muslims.

Steve Ayling, a 40-year-old Brooklyn plumber who carried his sign to a dry spot by an office building, said the people behind the mosque project are "the same people who took down the twin towers."

[...]

On a nearby sidewalk, police chased away a group that unfurled a banner with images of beating, stoning and other torture they said was committed by those who followed Islamic law.

A mannequin wearing a keffiyeh, a traditional Arab headdress, was mounted on one of two mock missiles that were part of an anti-mosque installation. One missile was inscribed with the words: "Again? Freedom Targeted by Religion"; the other with "Obama: With a middle name Hussein. We understand. Bloomberg: What is your excuse?"

[...]

"This is sacred ground and it's where my son was buried," the native Israeli from Queens said. She said the mosque would be "like a knife in our hearts."

She was joined by a close friend, Kobi Mor, who flew from San Francisco to participate in the rally.

If the mosque gets built, "we will bombard it," Mor said. He would not elaborate but added that he believes the project "will never happen."

Reuters: One sign read: "Everything I Ever Needed to Know about Islam I Learned on 9/11." According to a Reuters report on the August 22 protest, "One sign read: 'Everything I Ever Needed to Know about Islam I Learned on 9/11.'" From Reuters:

Many in the crowd opposing the center were firefighters and construction workers, who carried signs reading: "This is Sacred Ground to New Yorkers."

One sign read: "Everything I Ever Needed to Know about Islam I Learned on 9/11."

Protest sign: "Islam + Shariah Law = Barborism (sic)." Fox news aired footage of the August 22 protest showing a sign which read, "Islam + Shariah law = Barborism [sic]." From the August 23 broadcast of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

Numerous signs depict "Sharia" written in blood: As the AP reported, during the August 22 protest, "Signs hoisted by dozens of protesters standing behind police barricades read 'SHARIA' -- using dripping, blood-red letters to describe Islam's Shariah law, which governs the behavior of Muslims."

Installation featured Muslim in keffiyeh riding a missile that said "Again? Freedom Targeted by Religion." The AP reported that at the August 22 protest, "A mannequin wearing a keffiyeh, a traditional Arab headdress, was mounted on one of two mock missiles that were part of an anti-mosque installation. One missile was inscribed with the words: 'Again? Freedom Targeted by Religion.'" The AP added that the second missile said, "Obama: With a middle name Hussein. We understand. Bloomberg: What is your excuse?"

Sign: "No clubhouse for terrorists." A Reuters photograph of the August 22 protest shows a man holding a sign, saying, "No Clubhouse for Terrorists."

Protest sign: "We don't need a monument to those who attacked our country at ground zero." A different Reuters photograph of the August 22 protest shows a man holding the following sign:

Protest sign: "Islam is no longer a legitimate religion." From the New York Post:

Previous Park51 protests also featured inflammatory imagery and rhetoric

Protest sign: "Building a Mosque at Ground Zero is Like Building a memorial to Hitler at Auschwitz." The August 2 broadcast of Fox News' Happening Now featured footage of a recent protest against Park51, which included a sign that read, "Building a Mosque at Ground Zero is Like Building a memorial to Hitler at Auschwitz." From Happening Now:

Protest sign: "Proud to be an Islamophobe." Happening Now  also showed footage of an anti-Park 51 protester which read, "Jesus died to save you Allah wants you to kill for him! Proud to be an Islamophobe." From Happening Now:

Protest sign: "Islam = Hate"; "Islam = terrorist"; "Islam = Killing." Eye on the World blog posted a "photo report" from Pam Geller's June 6 Park51 protest. Geller linked to the "photo report" in a blog post touting her protest. From Eye on the World:

Protest sign invokes Nazis, calls Islam "the Enemy." From Eye on the World's "photo report":

Protest sign: "Mosques Breed Radical Islam ... Radical Islam Breeds Terrorists." From Eye of the World:

Protest sign compares mosque to a toilet, asks, "Do you want this built on Ground Zero? I don't!!!!!" From Eye of the World's complete "anti-mosque protest" photo gallery:

Protest sign: "Islam Kills." From Eye of the World's complete "anti-mosque protest" photo gallery:

Right-wing media have relentlessly attacked Park 51 and Islam, often with extreme rhetoric

Gingrich compares Islamic center to Nazis erecting sign near Holocaust museum, Japanese site near Pearl Harbor. On the August 16 edition of Fox & Friends, Newt Gingrich said: "Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center."

Nugent: "The mosque will attract extremists and radicals who will try to harm America." In an August 19 Washington Times op-ed attacking Park51, Ted Nugent wrote that "[t]he mosque will attract extremists and radicals who will try to harm America." Nugent repeatedly referred to Islam as a "voodoo religion" and concluded, "If additional American blood is spilled in the Big Apple, the politicians who supported this mosque will be as guilty as the Muslim voodoo kooks who love death and destruction in the name of Allah."

Cal Thomas repeatedly suggests Park51 would be a terrorist front. In an August 3 column, conservative commentator Cal Thomas wrote: "Ask yourself: if you wanted to infiltrate a country, wouldn't a grand strategy be to rapidly build mosques from Ground Zero in New York, to Temecula, Calif., and establish beachheads so fanatics could plan and advance their strategies under the cover of religious freedom and that great American virtue known as 'tolerance,' which is being used against us?" In a July 21 post on The Washington Post's On Faith blog, Thomas wrote:

A mosque near Ground Zero is not about tolerance, but triumphalism. It isn't about honoring the dead, but celebrating their deaths.

[...]

Don't we know why our enemies desire a beachhead in America? They wish to launch new terror attacks and forcibly convert Americans to their way of thinking and believing. What will we gain by allowing this to happen?

Morris: Park 51 will be used to "train and recruit Sharia law advocates who become terrorists." On the August 19 edition of Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Dick Morris cited a study that he claimed said "80 percent of the mosques ... teach Sharia law as the main event." Morris later claimed that Park 51 will be used to "study and promote and train and recruit Sharia law advocates, which, who become terrorists."

Morris: "[T]hese Sharia mosques ... have become the command center for terrorists" and Park51 "would be, too." On the August 18 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, during a discussion of Park51, Morris claimed "these Sharia mosques ... have become the command centers for terrorists," adding, "so this one would be, too."

Bolling: Park51 "may be a meeting place for some of the scariest minds -- some of the biggest terrorist minds." On the August 19 edition of Fox & Friends, Fox Business host Eric Bolling claimed that Park51 "may be a meeting place for some of the scariest minds -- some of the biggest terrorist minds."

Kilmeade: "The next Hamburg cell could be right downtown." During the discussion with Bolling on the August 19 Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said of Park51, "The next Hamburg cell could be right downtown." A terrorist cell in Hamburg, Germany, whose members would later become the 9-11 hijackers, is believed to be the origin of the 9-11 plot.

Limbaugh suggests Park51 would be a "recruiting tool for domestic extremists." On the August 3 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh stated that if the Guantanamo Bay detention center "is a recruiting tool for foreign extremists, what about a World Trade Center mosque being a recruiting tool for domestic extremists?"

Fox guest suggests Islamic cultural center is intended to "trumpet" Muslim conquest. On the August 16 edition of Fox & Friends, guest Jeanine Pirro -- former Republican candidate for New York state attorney general -- said, "I think the whole idea of the mosque is outrageous, and if you're a student of history, you know that mosques are often built to trumpet their victories."

Franklin Graham: "True Islam" can't be practiced in U.S. because "you cannot beat your wife, you cannot do honor killings." On the August 19 broadcast of CNN's John King USA, Franklin Graham repeated his frequent attacks on Islam, claiming that "remember true Islam cannot be practiced here in this country. You cannot beat your wife. You cannot do honor killing if you think your daughter has been misbehaved. You cannot kill her. And they're protected by the laws of this country. We're not under Sharia law. We're under the Constitution of the United States. And so we're protected."

Beck asks, "[A]fter you've killed 3,000 people, you're going to now build your mosque?" On his August 18 radio show, Glenn Beck said of Park51, "You look for things that are uniting, I'm sorry, but the Cordoba Project is not uniting. If you wanted to unite people, you don't spit in their face. You don't spit in their face. On the 10th anniversary, after you've killed 3,000 people, you're going to now build your mosque on there, really?" Beck has repeatedly falsely claimed that Park51 was scheduled to open on September 11, 2011. He has also referred to the Islamic center as "the 9-11 mosque" and has wondered if it is "a possibility" that Park51's location is about "inoculation."

Limbaugh calls Islamic center "a victory monument at Ground Zero." On August 17, Limbaugh called Park51 "a victory monument at Ground Zero, which is what this mosque is." He added: "The real question is why do people who don't like this country want that mosque there? What is so important about having it there?"

Palin calls Park 51 a "stab in the heart" for Americans and a "slap" to 9-11 victims. During the August 16 edition of Fox News' On the Record, Fox News contributor Sarah Palin claimed that it was "an insensitive move on the part of those Muslims who want to build that mosque in this location. It feels like a stab in the heart to, collectively, Americans who still have that lingering pain from 9-11." Palin later said, "[T]his is a slap to those innocent victims who were murdered that day on 9-11."

Hoft dubs Park 51 the "Ground Zero Victory Mosque." In an August 16 Gateway Pundit post, Jim Hoft touted Fox News' Bill O'Reilly's criticism of Obama's comments about Park 51 and described the Islamic community center as the "Ground Zero Victory Mosque."

Washington Times: "If the mosque is constructed, the terrorists win." In an August 19 editorial, The Washington Times stated of the planned Islamic community center in New York City: "The Ground Zero Mosque is not healing a rift but deepening a wound. If the mosque is constructed, the terrorists win."

Beck on Park51: "Why don't we build it on the graves of people that lost their lives?" On his August 16 radio show, Beck asked, "Why don't we build it on the graves of people that lost their lives?" Beck added, "Where are the American Muslims" speaking out against the Islamic community center?"

BigPeace.com: Violence against women is "taking place almost exclusively from within Islamic communities." An August 9 post on Andrew Brietbart's BigPeace.com claims that "previously unimagined assaults on women and girls are taking place almost exclusively from within Islamic communities." In fact, the problem of violence against women is widespread and not exclusive to any one community.

Geller absurdly compared NYC mosque to building a KKK "shrine" near black Alabama church. On the August 11 edition of Fox & Friends, Geller absurdly compared building an Islamic cultural center two blocks away from Ground Zero in New York to building a Ku Klux Klan "shrine" near a black church in Alabama.

Texas right-wing radio host on Park51: "I hope somebody blows it up." While discussing Park51 on his May 26 radio show, as Think Progress reported, right-wing Houston radio host Michael Berry said, "I'll tell you this: If you do build a mosque, I hope somebody blows it up."

Geller launches "Leaving Islam" campaign, attacks Park51 as "stab[bing] Americans in the eye." On May 27, Fox & Friends hosted Geller to discuss her "Leaving Islam" campaign, in which she targets people who want to "leave Islam" because it is a "danger" for them to do so. Geller denied that she was encouraging people to "leave Islam." She also touted her "effort" to protest Park51 and wondered why "they would want to stab Americans in the eye" by building the center near the site of the World Trade Center.

Kilmeade asks if the "Islamic community" is "gloating" by building Park51 near Ground Zero. On May 26, Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade said: "Six-hundred feet from World Tower 1, World Trade Center 1 stood, is this gloating on the part of the Islamic community?" Guest Andrew McCarthy said that this was "Islamist supremacism" and that "well-meaning people would know that this is an affront to common sense." Kilmeade had previously described the Islamic center plans as "an outrage" and accused Muslims of "taunting" 9-11 victims.

Glenn Beck's attempts to "reclaim the civil rights movement" and "pick up Martin Luther King's dream" ring hollow when contrasted with the radio and TV host's long record of racially-charged, offensive rhetoric.

Attacks on "racist" President Obama

Beck: Obama is a "racist" with a "deep-seated hatred for white people." On the July 28, 2009, edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Beck said of President Obama: "This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture." Beck added: "I'm not saying that he doesn't like white people, I'm saying he has a problem. He has a -- this guy is, I believe, a racist." The following day, Beck stood by the remarks: "I think the president is a racist."

Beck suggested Obama's name is un-American. On the February 4 edition of The Glenn Beck Program, Beck said of Obama: "He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical?"

Obama pushing for "reparations." On several occasions, Beck has claimed that Obama's agenda is driven by a desire for "reparations" and to "settle old racial scores":  

• Health care reform. "This guy is not who he says he is. None of his bills, none of his proposals are about what he says they're about. The health care bill is reparations. It's the beginning of reparations. He's going to give -- if you want to go into medical school, the medical schools will get more federal dollars if they have proven that they are putting minorities ahead." [The Glenn Beck Program, 7/22/09]
• Assistance to Native Americans. On November 11, 2009, Beck said: "When the president was sitting there, or standing there, and he was talking about Native American rights in the middle of a tragedy, Fort Hood, it didn't feel right. And it seemed, maybe to me, that he was even promising reparations." [The Glenn Beck Program, 11/9/09]
• Everything Obama does. "Everything that is getting pushed through Congress, including this health care bill, are transforming America. And they are all driven by President Obama's thinking on one idea: reparations. ... These massive programs are Obama brand reparations -- or in presidential speak, leveling out the playing field. But, just in case the universalness of the program doesn't somehow or another quench his reparation appetite, he is making sure to do his part to pay the debt in the other areas." [Glenn Beck, 7/23/09]

Obama elected because of race, not policies. On the June 8, 2009, edition of his radio program, Beck said of the 2008 election: "You were voting for - not change, but change, I think, in race. You were like 'Hey, let's put this behind us.' I think a lot of people were there. They weren't necessarily for his policies because his policies and everything else are - what are they?"

Obsession with slavery

Beck sees "slavery" everywhere. Beck frequently invokes "slaves" and "slavery" in attacking Democrats and progressives. Among the topics which Beck has compared to slavery:

• Government debt. "Here's the debt per citizen. Debt per taxpayer is $118,000. Federal budget deficit, U.S. federal spending - bring the unfunded liabilities. This is a great one. Here it is - $109 trillion. The liability per citizen is $352,588. I'd like to see the calculation on what it is per taxpayer - $109 trillion. Do you see all of these zeros? You know what those are? Those are links in a chain. It is slavery. It is slavery for you and slavery for our children. Your kids are being enslaved." [Glenn Beck (accessed via Nexis), 6/14/10]
• Government spending. "The government's irresponsible spending is turning us into slaves. You might well literally lock us into chains, at least our children." [Glenn Beck, 5/29/09]
•  Central government planning. "His name Friedrich A. Hayek. I bring him up today because he's kind of an a-ha moment for a lot of people. We're in a similar war today, but if you don't know history, you don't know about this man. If you don't know history, you can't make the decisions that we need to make. Starting in the early 1940, Hayek began writing a little book called "The Road to Serfdom." The book clearly and logically explained how any form of central government planning usually leads to serfdom, or servitude, slavery. It extinguishes freedom." [Glenn Beck (accessed via Nexis), 6/8/10]
• Recipients of federal aid. "These are the people who've been abused by the system. They've been taught they needed the government. They've been taught to be slaves, and their master is Washington. Both parties! Well the truth shall set you free and it is coming with a vengeance." [Glenn Beck, 11/3/09]
• Illegal immigration. "Most Americans say we should not count illegal immigrants in the census. But the union bosses think they should count them. They argue that we have to count all of them. It's funny, because I was thinking about this today, and I was thinking -- I think this is pretty close to the same argument we had in Philadelphia during a convention there. It was 1787, we were debating the Constitution. Here's what the debate was. The Founders, despite what revisionist historians want to tell you, wanted an end to slavery. Not all of them. Not in the South. But most of them. I've told you on this program many times: illegal immigration is modern-day slavery." [Glenn Beck, 10/9/09]
• Progressive policies. "They have no idea, it is the very progressive policies that these people are cheering that contribute to making them so desperate that they are out in the street looking for free cash. ... Progressive policies are keeping these people in slavery. Slavery to government, welfare, affirmative action, regulation, control. They know better than you do. They try to control every aspect of your life." [Glenn Beck, 10/27/09]
• Economic stimulus package. "It is the nanny state. They're going to tell us what we can eat. They can tell us what our temperature needs to be in our homes. They can tell us what kind of car to drive. They can tell businesses how to run their business. It's slavery. It is slavery." [Fox & Friends, 2/10/09]
• "Government giveaways." "You know what this president is doing right now? He is addicting this country to heroin -- the heroin that is government slavery. It is -- it's just the government giveaways." [Glenn Beck, 2/11/09]
• Tax deduction rule changes. "But this is enslaving, what our president has proposed and what's in this new bill. Changes in the tax deductions for charitable giving. ... When I found out that Barack Obama and the Democrats have put in a reduction in the deductions for charitable giving, and then follow it up with 'yeah, but we put a lot of money in the stimulus package to go ahead and cover those losses for those charities,' I thought this is insane, irresponsible, and quite honestly, because it involves enslaving people, evil." [Glenn Beck, 3/2/09]

Obama as the "slavemaster." On the January 11 edition of his Fox News show, Beck said of Obama: "The most effective way to become the slavemaster and make them come to you is to make them come to you for employment. How could you ever, if you're the president, lose your job if the voter understands that 'if I vote for the competitor who wants to reduce the size of government, that means my job goes away. I'll lose my job.' The real power grab is getting them into your employ."

Beck praised constitutional provision protecting slave trade. In his 2009 book Arguing With Idiots, Beck reprinted and praised the now-obsolete Article I, Section 9, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which prohibited Congress from ending the slave trade before 1808 and capped taxes on the slave trade at $10 per slave. Beck, without mentioning slavery, interpreted the provision to mean that "the Founders actually put a price tag on coming to this country: $10 per person. Apparently they felt like there was a value to being able to live here."

Beck's "racial hang-ups" and ethnic stereotyping

Beck's "funny 'black guy' character." Journalist Alexander Zaitchik wrote in his September 2009 profile of Beck for Salon.com that Beck, as a younger man, had many "racial hang-ups." According to Zaitchik: "Among the show's regular characters was Beck's zoo alter ego, Clydie Clyde. But Clyde was just one of Beck's unseen radio ventriloquist dolls. 'He was amazing to watch when he was doing his cast of voices,' remembers Kathi Lincoln, Beck's former newsreader. 'Sometimes he'd prerecord different voices and talk back to the tape, or turn his head side to side while speaking them live on the air. He used to do a funny "black guy" character, really over-the-top.' "

Beck's Top 40 radio "racist tropes." In an August 24 entry to the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hate Watch blog, Zaitchik wrote:

Throughout his career in Top 40 radio, Beck was known for his imitations of "black guy" characters and racist tropes. According to Beck's former colleagues in the late 90s, this included mocking unarmed blacks shot and killed by white police officers. Such was the case of Malik Jones, the victim of a controversial killing that took place in 1997.

"After the shooting, Beck sometimes did a racist shtick," remembers Paul Bass, a former radio host and Beck colleague at a Clear Channel station cluster in New Haven. "Glenn did routines about Jones' grandmother being on crack. Generally he made fun of his family and the loss of life--as joke routines."

Beck's racially tinged tirades did not disappear after he switched formats in 1999. During his first talk radio stint in Tampa, he often referred to the Rev. Jesse Jackson as "the stinking king of the race lords."

Beck forced to apologize for "mocking Asians." In 1995, Beck and his co-hosts at KC101 in Hartford, Connecticut were made to apologize for mocking an Asian man who called into the program. The Hartford Courant reported in October 20, 1995: "When [Zhihan] Tong telephoned WKCI- FM to protest the broadcast as a racial slur, disc jockeys Glenn Beck and Pat Grey made fun of him. The two played a gong in the background several times, and Papineau, the executive producer, mocked a Chinese accent."

Beck's book stuffed with stereotypes. Beck's Arguing With Idiots is rife with cartoons depicting serape- and sombrero-clad Mexicans with thick mustaches. The book also uses a cartoon Chinese takeout container to represent Chinese immigrants.

Beck promotes racist anti-Semite Elizabeth Dilling

Beck: The Red Network did "what we're doing now." On his June 4 radio program, Beck promoted The Red Network by Elizabeth Dilling, saying of the 1934 book: "This is a book -- and I'm a getting a ton of these -- from people who were doing what we're doing now. We now are documenting who all of these people are. Well, there were Americans in the first 50 years of this nation that took this seriously, and they documented it." [The Glenn Beck Program, 6/4/10]

The Red Network is rife with racism and anti-Semitism. As Media Matters noted, Dilling's book contains numerous passages that espouse anti-Semitism and racism. At various points throughout the book, Dilling attacked "racial inter-mixture" as a communist plot, referred to "un-Christianized" "colored people" as "savages," called Hinduism and Islam "debasing and degrading," and blamed Nazi Germany's anti-Semitism on "revolutionary Russian Jews."

Dilling herself was a Nazi sympathizer. Dilling visited Germany in the late 1930s, and attended Nazi party meetings and praised Adolf Hitler's leadership. She also spoke at rallies hosted by U.S. Nazi organizations after the outbreak of World War II. Following the war, she leveled anti-Semitic attacks against several U.S. presidents, calling Dwight Eisenhower "Ike the Kike," attacking Richard Nixon for his "service to the synagogue," and calling John F. Kennedy's New Frontier program the "Jew frontier."

Historian lambasted Beck's "ludicrous" behavior. In an interview with Media Matters, historian Glen Jeansonne said it is "ludicrous that this book written in the 1930s by a woman who was considered a crackpot at the time ... could be cited as an authority on Communism."

Beck refused to apologize. On June 7, Beck briefly reacted to the controversy surrounding his approving citation of Dilling's work, but refused to apologize for promoting her hateful work on the air. Instead, Beck attacked "the left" for calling him "a Jew-loving Nazi sympathizer."

Glenn Beck has described his August 28 Restoring Honor rally with outrageous hyperbole, calling it everything from "an American miracle" to a "defibrillator to the heart of America." Beck has also claimed that with the rally, he and his audience will be able to "reclaim" the "distorted" civil rights movement.

Beck on his rally: National "turning point," "the anti-Woodstock," a "defibrillator to the heart of America"

Beck: 8-28 will be "a defibrillator to the heart of America." On the August 16 edition of his Fox News show, before he launched into a fundraising appeal for his rally, Beck described his August 28 Restoring Honor rally as "a defibrillator to the heart of America."

Beck says his 8-28 rally will be "the Woodstock of the next generation." On the August 19 edition of his radio show, Beck described his rally as "the Woodstock of the next generation." Beck further explained that just as "Woodstock inspired a generation," his rally "could be a new generation's defining moment." He also "guarantee[d]" his audience that if they don't attend, they "will say, 'Oh crap, I wish I would've been there.' "

Beck: 8-28 is "the anti-Woodstock." The next day, Beck described the rally as "the anti-Woodstock." Beck asked his audience if they remembered "how Woodstock just -- it just stopped people and put them in that place" and claimed that "[t]he people who went, that was the moment for them." Beck told his viewers that "[t]his will be a moment that they will remember for the rest of their lives." He also told them that if they didn't attend they will regret it "for the rest of their life."

Beck: "Maybe in a 100 years from now or 200 years from now ... this will be remembered as the moment America turned the corner." On the June 8 edition of his radio show, Beck asked his audience to "bring your children with you" to his rally, claiming it will be "an image for the history books." He went on to suggest that he believed that "maybe in a 100 years from now or 200 years from now" the event "will be remembered as the moment America turned the corner." He added, "I believe this is the pivot point."

Beck claims his rally will "grow the next George Washington and Abraham Lincoln." On his May 27 radio show, Beck urged his listeners to attend the August 28 rally, imploring them to join him "to set things right in [their] own li[ves]." Beck went on to suggest that attending the rally would help to "grow the next George Washington and Abraham Lincoln" and restore America.

Beck: "I really, truly believe" that 8-28 "will be remembered in American history as the turning point." On May 26, Beck advised his listeners to come to Washington, D.C. on the Thursday and Friday nights preceding his rally for events that he referred to as "unforgettable" and which "will make you weep all night." He then claimed that his Saturday rally "will be remembered in American history as the turning point." He went on to suggest that though it may be "even erased for history for a long time," when "our children are the ones that are writing history, it will be remembered as the turning point in the American experiment."

Beck: "You will see something on Saturday that has not happened in America for 228 years." On August 24, Beck promoted his rally, claiming that his audience "will see something on Saturday that has not happened in America for 228 years." Beck then said that the event would be "a historic moment" and that "if you read about it the next day or you see it on TV, you will say, 'Oh man, I wish I would have gone.' " Beck also said of his 8-28 event and Divine Destiny event the night before, "This is a God event on Friday and a God event on Saturday." He again implored his audience to "bring your children" to the event, claiming that attendees will "come as you are, but you leave there much more powerful."

Beck: 8-28 rally is "going to be one for the history books," "a turning point in America." On the June 10 edition of his radio show, Beck again claimed that his rally will be "a turning point in America." He also stated that the event is "going to be one for the history books" and could, in fact, be "double history" because it "may be the last time anybody's going to be allowed to gather at the Lincoln Memorial."

Beck claims "the Capitol will fix itself if we just stand between Washington and Lincoln and try to be those people." On May 7, Beck suggested on his television show that while "everybody tries to fix the Capitol," it is the attendees of his Restoring Honor rally that will succeed. Beck claimed that "the Capitol will fix itself if we just stand between Washington and Lincoln and try to be those people. Restore honor and the country will be fixed"

Beck: Restoring Honor rally "is a shockwave." On the August 18 edition of his radio show, Beck began "begging" his audience to attend the Restoring Honor rally, stating that if "you are looking for a restoration ... and you understand honor" to "come stand with" him. He referred to the event as a "shockwave," telling his listeners that "it is truly going to be something where you come as you are, but you leave much, much, much stronger."

8-28 will "reclaim the civil rights movement"

Beck: It was "divine providence" that 8-28 rally is on the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech. Beck discussed the date of his Restoring Honor rally on the June 18 edition of his radio show, claiming he didn't know that 8-28 was the date of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech and stated that it was "divine providence" that his rally coincided with the speech's anniversary. Beck said of the date, "[w]hat an appropriate day," because he thought that King's "dream has been so corrupted." Beck then argued that "it's time we picked that dream back up." Beck later defended holding his rally on 8-28 by claiming that "whites don't own the Founding Fathers" and "blacks don't own Martin Luther King."

Beck compares his "historic" 8-28 rally to King's "I have a dream" speech. On the August 9 edition of his radio show, Beck stated that "the more we get into" the Restoring Honor rally, "the more historic it feels." Beck then compared his rally to the 1963 March on Washington at which King delivered his "I have a dream" speech, suggesting that his 5-year-old daughter "will remember this moment," just as someone Beck spoke with who went to King's rally when she was 5 years old remembered that event. Beck told his listeners that "this is going to be something that you'll never, ever experience any other time."

Beck: At 8-28 rally, we will "pick up Martin Luther King's dream that has been distorted." On the June 15 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that at the 8-28 event, he and his audience will "create history together ... as we pick up Martin Luther King's dream that has been distorted and lost." He also said that "your children will be able to say, 'I remember, I was there.' "

Beck says his 8-28 rally will "reclaim the civil rights movement." On the May 26 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that the civil rights movement "has been so distorted and so turned upside down. It is -- it's an abomination what has happened." He said that his rally would "be an iconic event" and that "this is a moment, quite honestly, that I think we reclaim the civil rights movement." Beck also stated that though, at the rally, "we're not going to talk about the issues of illegal immigration or anything that's happening in Washington," the attendees of the rally "will reclaim the civil rights moment. We will take that movement, because we were the people that did it in the first place."

8-28: The "American miracle"

Beck: "I expect a miracle on 8-28." On the July 22 edition of his radio show, Beck stated, "I expect a miracle on 8-28." Beck also used a Biblical allusion to encourage his listeners to use the "40 days and 40 nights" before his rally to "change your life" and "start all over again." Beck then asked his listeners to "witness" the "miracle" with him on 8-28.

Beck: "What is going to happen on 8-28 will be a miracle." On his television show on August 11, Beck claimed that "what is going to happen on 8-28 will be a miracle." Beck told his viewers that he is "filled with great hope because I remember, not what I've said to you, but what I know to be true. I've said for some time now, expect miracles." He also told his listeners: "Literally, expect to see miracles. Great, powerful miracles are coming." Beck also repeated the claim that his rally will be "a historic event" and again suggested that "there are forces in the government now that are trying to stop any new gatherings -- after this one -- on the Lincoln Memorial."

Beck asks listeners to "be a part of an American miracle" on 8-28. On the August 23 edition of his radio show, Beck encouraged his listeners to attend his Restoring Honor rally by asking them to "be a part of an American miracle." Beck appealed to his listeners by saying: "Please, if you are not thinking of coming to 8-28, or there's some reason, you're thinking, 'Oh I'm not really sure' -- something miraculous is going to happen on Saturday."

Beck says that "something miraculous is going to happen" at his 8-28 rally. On the August 16 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that he doesn't "know how many people will come" but that "something miraculous is going to happen." Beck suggested that "your life, your fortune, and your country are at stake." He further stated that "if the people show up, I think it's going to provide a shockwave to this nation." Beck told his listeners they need to "return to God, or we are going to be buried in the rubble of history."

8-28 "will be indelibly marked" on attendees

Beck: 8-28 rally "will be indelibly marked" on your children. On the August 12 edition of his radio program, Beck encouraged potential attendees of his rally to "bring your children" because the event "will be indelibly marked. It will be marked forever. ... It will be a brand on them." He also suggested that his listeners "sleep in your car" and reiterated, "I'm not kidding you, sleep in your car."

Beck: 8-28 "will be life-changing." On the April 16 edition of his radio show, Beck described his Restoring Honor event as one that "will be life-changing." He also suggested that the event will be "a moment you won't soon forget." Beck explained that it would be similar to his "American Revival" events and will be a "spiritual awakening."

Beck: Restoring Honor rally "is going to be a moment" and "you will never, ever forget it." On the May 24 edition of his radio show, Beck explained that he felt "overwhelm[ed]" by the "gravity" of organizing his rally. He then told his audience that he wanted them "to bring your son and daughter, and I want you to bring your grandchildren," because "this is going to be a moment." Beck claimed that "you will never, ever forget" the rally and that "it will be worth your time" and described the event as a "pivot point."

Beck: 8-28 is "historic" and "will be a thing that your children will remember." On the August 9 edition of his radio show, Beck suggested that his 8-28 rally will be a "historic" event. He claimed that "this will be something that you will read about and say, 'Oh man, I wish I were there,' " and will "be a thing that your children will remember."

Beck: An 8-year-old who attends rally will 20 years later say, "That's when my feet were put on a path." On the August 23 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that "in 20 years from now, someone will be 28 and they will say, 'I remember my parents took me as a kid, and I remember that moment, and I remember -- that's when I decided that I was going to live my life in a different way. That's when I decided I knew what was important. That's when my feet were put on a path.' " Beck also suggested that "if your children are with you at the Lincoln Memorial this Saturday, I can tell you that America will be fine 25, 30, 35 years from now."

8-28 has so many "enemies" because it's "going to be one for the history books"

Beck: Because 8-28 is "going to be one for the history books," the "enemies have come out from the woodwork." On the June 28 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that he knows that his 8-28 rally will be "historic" because, "boy, have the enemies come out of the woodwork on this one." Beck also touted the fact that people are coming to the event despite not knowing what is going to happen because "they feel something is going to be big, something is historic, something important is going to happen." Beck continued by saying that his event is "going to be one for the history books."

Beck: I "can't be more clear" about 8-28 rally because "the forces arrayed against this are unbelievable." On the July 15 edition of his radio show, Beck claimed that he could not "be more clear" and was not releasing more details about the Restoring Honor rally because "the forces arrayed against this are unbelievable, and the depths that they will dive down to is incredible." Beck explained that he could not "tell you what's going on" because "I am not going to put anybody else in danger. I am not going to put anybody else in the line of making their life a living hell up until 8-28." He added, "Just know that it is going to be inspirational and history will be made."

Beck: The Obama administration "is coordinating" effort by New Black Panther Party to "disrupt 8-28." On the July 9 edition of his radio show, Beck suggested that "what's happening with 8-28" is that the Obama administration "is coordinating through the Center for American Progress or Van Jones" an effort for the New Black Panther Party to "come and disrupt 8-28."

Beck: "The campaign against this thing is absolutely unbelievable." A few days later, on June 30, Beck claimed that "the campaign against this thing is absolutely unbelievable." Beck also suggested that "this may be the last time people are gathered at the Lincoln Memorial, and boy, the left is doing everything they can to stop it from happening." He also alleged that people were trying to "smear" him by claiming that he did not have the proper permits for his rally.

Beck: The left is organizing like never before because they "know how important this is." On the July 1 edition of his radio show, Beck detailed transportation options for the rally when he claimed that "the left is organizing against 8-28." He further claimed that "they are mobilizing like I have never seen before." Beck alleges that the reason for such unprecedented opposition is because "they know how important this is" because, according to Beck, "this is the summer that it turns."

Beck: "The left is doing everything they can to suppress turnout" to 8-28. On the July 19 edition of his television show, Beck told his viewers that "the left is doing everything they can to suppress turnout" and to "discredit this event." He further claimed that "they have said and will continue to say all kinds of things about me," because "they want you to be angry" and "they need you to strike out."

On his Fox News show, Sean Hannity repeatedly distorted Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's words to say that Rauf "scares" him by "wanting America to be Sharia compliant." In fact, Rauf has actually said that the current American political system, including the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, is Sharia compliant.

Hannity: Rauf "scares me" saying he wants "America to be Sharia compliant"

Hannity: "He scares me, wanting America to be Sharia compliant." On the August 25 edition of his Fox News program, referring to Rauf, who wants to build an Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan, Hannity said: He "says America should be Sharia compliant." Hannity also said of Rauf: "He scares me, wanting America to be Sharia compliant." Later, Hannity said he had "spent a lot of time going over this controversial imam" and claimed that Rauf "wants America Sharia compliant." Hannity's comments echoed his prior attacks on Rauf for writing in his 2004 book, What's Right With Islam, that "the American political structure is Sharia compliant."

Rauf: "American political structure is Shariah compliant" because it "protects" "God-given rights"

Rauf: "American political structure is Shariah compliant." In fact, Rauf does not call for making the United States Sharia compliant in What's Right With Islam; rather, he argues that the "American political structure is Shariah compliant" just like any other political structure that "upholds, protects, and furthers" the "God-given rights" of "life, mind (that is, mental well-being or sanity), religion, property (or wealth), and family (or lineage and progeny)."

Rauf: Declaration of Independence expresses an "Islamic ... ethic." Rauf writes in his book that the Declaration of Independence "opens with the words 'When ... it becomes necessary for one People ... to assume ... the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them' (italics added)." Rauf also comments that "[t]o Muslims, the law decreed by God is called the Shariah, and therefore the 'Laws of Nature and of Nature's God' are by definition Shariah law." He also writes: "What's right about America is its Declaration of Independence, for it embodies and restates the core values of the Abrahamic, and thus also the Islamic, ethic."

Rauf: Any system of rule that protects "God-given rights" "is therefore legally 'Islamic,' or Shariah compliant, in its substance." In his book, Rauf writes that "Muslim legal scholars have defined five areas of life that Islamic law must protect and further. These are life, mind (that is, mental well-being or sanity), religion, property (or wealth), and family (or lineage and progeny)." Rauf says that because the American political system "upholds, protects, and furthers these rights," it is "Shariah compliant, in its substance." From What's Right With Islam:

Any system of rule that upholds, protects, and furthers these rights is therefore legally "Islamic," or Shariah compliant, in its substance. Because these rights are God-given, they are inalienable and cannot be deprived of any man or woman without depriving them of their essential humanity.

What I am demonstrating is that the American political structure is Shariah compliant. [Page 86]

Rauf: Islamic ideals allow for constitutional checks and balances. Rauf further writes in What's Right With Islam that Muslim jurists defined principles for "bay'ah," or consent of the governed, to be valid, among them that "[c]onsent of the governed may not be coerced or obtained under duress" and that a leader must "maintain the government's legitimacy by securing, protecting, and furthering the inalienable rights of the governed." Rauf also wrote that "in both Islamic and American ideals of government, a legitimate government allows a system of checks and balances on its rule."

Hannity has previously falsely accused Rauf of wanting to shred the Constitution

Hannity: "I'm not talking about shredding our Constitution and putting Sharia law as the law of the land in America, as [Rauf] is." On the August 12 edition of his Fox News program, Hannity said that Rauf "wants America to be Sharia compliant." Hannity went on to state: "I'm not talking about shredding our Constitution and putting Sharia law as the law of the land in America, as [Rauf] is."

Glenn Beck says his August 28 "Restoring Honor" rally in Washington, D.C., will be a "non-political" event. However, many aspects of the rally, including its promotion by Beck and allied conservative groups, have been explicitly political.

Beck claims 8-28 rally will be "non-political" 

Beck: Rally about "First Amendment rights" and honoring the military. The webpage for Beck's August 28 "Restoring Honor" rally in the National Mall in Washington, D.C., describes the event as a "non-political, non-partisan event" that "will recognize our First Amendment rights and honor the service members who fight to protect those freedoms." The rally will raise funds for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation.  

Conservative groups deeply involved with 8-28

Tea Party Patriots providing staff, promotion. An August 24 Politico article reported that Beck requested that the conservative group assist with planning the rally: 

At the request of Beck's team, which lacked the organizational infrastructure or logistical know-how to pull off Saturday's march, asked for assistance, Tea Party Patriots agreed to help promote the march among its 500,000 email subscribers and to provide 400 volunteers to staff it, a requirement before the National Park Service would issue a permit. 

National Rifle Association sponsoring, promoting the event. As Media Matters noted, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reported that the NRA shipped copies of its news magazine with advertisements for Beck's 8-28 rally.  

FreedomWorks to cater to attendees' "political" interests. According to a July 17 Politico article reported that Beck had "offered assurances" to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation that "he will leave his politically charged rhetoric behind" for the rally, but will nonetheless encourage attendees interested in politics to join the right-wing group FreedomWorks, which is chaired by former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey: 

Instead, the plan is for Beck to tell rally attendees that, if they want to get involved in politics, they should sign up with FreedomWorks, said the group's president Matt Kibbe, who has appeared on Beck's radio show since FreedomWorks became a sponsor to talk tea party politics with Beck.

"This is about cultural renewal and a lot of the themes that he talks about on his show," Kibbe said of the August rally. "He'll go on to say, 'but we do need to organize and we do need to get politically active, and that's why I've joined forces with FreedomWorks, because they're the guys out there doing this, and I've looked around, and they're the best at what they do.'"

Americans for Prosperity providing buses to rally. Politico reported on August 24 that the Americans for Prosperity, a major conservative political organization backed by right-wing billionaire David A. Koch of the oil giant Koch Industries, "moved its annual Washington training session to correspond with Beck's rally and are offering to bus attendees to it." According to Politico:

"We very much appreciate and support Glenn's general message that he puts forth on a daily basis ... He consistently espouses free market views and views that espouse what the founders thought," said AFP President Tim Phillips. "It's a good message -- and so whatever direction he chooses to take with this day and this march, we support it."

FreedomWorks, Tea Party Patriots, hosting their own corresponding events. Politico also reported on July 17 that FreedomWorks and the Tea Party Patriots are "taking advantage of the expected crowds" at Beck's rally "to hold their own events." According to the article: "FreedomWorks' political action committee is holding a fundraiser and get-out-the-vote training session the night before Beck's rally, and the Tea Party Patriots are urging the 500,000 activists on their e-mail list to attend both Beck's rally and a tea party rally the following day to seek the repeal of the Democratic health care overhaul."

Sarah Palin will speak at rally

Palin a featured speaker at the 8-28 rally. On May 26, Beck announced that he had "selected" Sarah Palin to speak at the 8-28 rally "not for political reasons at all but because I think she understands duty and honor":

BECK: To bring on the medal of honor winners along with Gary Sinise will be somebody that I selected that I, not for political reasons at all but because I think she understands duty and honor, I think she understands what it's like -- the first people that we have to point out before we go into the badge of merit are the people that have done remarkable things in wartime. She has a son who is serving currently. Sarah Palin will also be joining.

Palin inextricably linked to GOP politics. After running as the Republican nominee for vice president in 2008 and serving half a term as Alaska's Republican governor, Palin has remained deeply involved in national GOP politics. Following the June 8 elections, several media outlets credited Palin's endorsements of various Republican candidates as critical to their primary victories. A June 24 ABCNews.com article reported: "Though she currently holds no political office, the former Alaska governor has emerged as a key player in some of the most contentious races. Her endorsements -- mostly done informally via Facebook and Twitter -- have sparked instant media attention and, in some cases, significantly boosted a candidate's popularity. Several of Palin's previously unknown picks have gained national attention."

Palin's political action committee, SarahPAC, has donated over $125,000 to federal candidates in the 2010 election cycle, every one of them a Republican.

Palin is a wildly polarizing political figure. As Greg Sargent of the Washington Post's The Plum Line blog noted, a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that Palin, while popular among "GOP primary voters," is "toxic" among "the broader electorate." The poll asked respondents to gauge their response to various attributes Congressional candidates might have, and 52 percent said they would have "some reservations about" or be "very uncomfortable with" Palin's endorsement of a candidate (just 25 percent said they'd be "enthusiastic" or "comfortable" with her endorsement).

GOP members of Congress raised money for the rally

Sen. Hatch and Rep. Chaffetz attended Beck fundraisers. The July 17 Politico article also reported that Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) attended a fundraising event with Beck in Salt Lake City to raise money for the Special Operations Warrior Fund. The Utah Republicans also attended one of Beck's "American Revival" events in Salt Lake City, the proceeds for which were "expected to go to Beck's production company, Mercury Radio Arts, which is also putting on the Restoring Honor rally."

GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachmann sold Capitol tour to raise funds for 8-28. Beck reportedly auctioned off a Capitol tour with Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and right-wing activist David Barton in order to raise funds for the 8-28 rally. The tour sold for $27,500.

Beck promotes the rally in political terms

Beck: Rally will "fix the capital." During his May 7 Fox News show, Beck said: "On August 28, I'm going to Washington, D.C., and I'm going to be at the feet of Abraham Lincoln and facing the Washington Monument. Everybody tries to fix the capital. I'm telling you, the capital will fix itself if we just stand between Washington and Lincoln and try to be those people. Restore honor in the country, and we'll be fixed."

Beck: Rally will "reclaim the civil rights movement." Also on his May 26 radio program, Beck said: "This is going to be an iconic event. This is going to be a moment that you'll never be able to paint people as haters, racists, none of it.  This is a moment quite honestly, that I think we reclaim the civil rights movement."

Beck will counter the alleged "progressive" distortion of the "badge of merit." Also on May 26, Beck said: "Today, we announced the first 15 minutes of the 8-28 event and the people that will join me on stage. We announced that we are going to start -- restart the badge of merit that George Washington gave his troops. It's what the Purple Heart is based on, except the progressives -- what a surprise -- in 1933 introduced the Purple Heart."

Events intended to lead up to 8-28 rally were explicitly political

Beck planned "education conventions" as precursor to 8-28, would teach Beck fans "how to be a politician." During a November 21, 2009, rally at a Florida retirement community, Beck announced that he would be holding several "education conventions" across the country in the lead-up to the 8-28 rally in Washington, DC. Beck said the conventions would teach participants "history," "finance," and "community organizing," and "if you want to be a politician, we're going to teach you how to be a politician."

BECK: So here's what we're doing. This is the beginning. Next year, we're holding - I've divided the country up into seven separate regions, and I'm having conventions around the country. They're education conventions. You're going to get up early on a Saturday morning and you're going to go to bed late. And you are going to learn about history, you're going to learn about finance, you're going to learn about community organizing. You're going to learn everything we need to know. If you want to be a politician, we're going to teach you how to be a politician. We're going to teach you the fundamentals of why values and virtues and ethics are important. We're going to mass together in our little community organizing group, the beginnings of the 9-12 group, and we are going to go out and register people to vote. But we're going to register people to vote without taking a dime from the federal government, and without smuggling any underage hookers across the border!

[...]

We're going to do seven of these, is the initial thought. And then, come August 28 - I would like you to make your plans now - to join me at the feet of Abraham Lincoln in Washington, DC.

Beck announced "100-year plan" for successful libertarian candidates. During his November 2009 rally, Beck explained why he believed libertarian candidates "never win elections," and said he was "developing a 100-year plan for America" to help implement libertarian policies:

BECK: Our libertarian friends, they never win elections because they always stand up and say "You know what? I'm gonna swear, take the oath of office on Tuesday. And on Wednesday, I'm abolishing the IRS. And on Thursday, I'm bringing all of our troops home from around the world." And, honestly, it can't be done. It has been done for a hundred years. A hundred years of laying this foundation. Some of the stupid stuff we can do on Tuesday afternoon. "Hey, let's skip the parade this year. I'm cleaning up some of the stupid stuff." But the rest of it might take two years, four years, ten years, fifty years. We need to start thinking like the Chinese. I'm developing a 100-year plan for America. A 100-year plan. We will plant this idea and it will sprout roots.

Beck designed "100-year plan" in response to progressive "ticking time bomb." At the same November 2009 rally, Beck explained that his "100-year plan" was developed to counteract a separate 100-year plan, allegedly set into motion "at the beginning of the Progressive movement," which Beck described as a "ticking time bomb" designed to bring about a "socialist utopia."

8-28 rally and "The Plan"

Beck planned to unveil "The Plan" at 8-28 rally. In a November 2009 announcement on his website, Beck hyped his "education conventions" and his "100 year plan," saying that they "will culminate in The Plan, a book that will provide specific policies, principles and, most importantly, action steps that each of us can take to play a role in this Refounding." Beck wrote that the "unveiling of The Plan" will occur at the 8-28 rally, "at the feet of Abraham Lincoln on the National Mall." Beck has since scuttled the "unveiling of the Plan," instead turning the event into a promotion for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation.

Beck's "Plan" puts conservative ideology over efficacy. Over the course of five Fox News shows in April 2010, Beck unveiled various elements of "The Plan," promising viewers on April 12 that he would show them "how to slash the budget." However, most of the proposals Beck and his guests offered valued conservative orthodoxy over efficacy.

• Medicare. On the April 13 edition of Glenn Beck, Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute recommended privatizing Medicare, saying that the best thing to do is go to a "consumer-based system" in which people who reach age 65 are given a federal voucher for $11,000 to "buy health insurance in the private market." On January 27, the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis of Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) legislation to privatize Medicare, which included a provision to provide vouchers to Medicare-eligible seniors, the "average value" of which would be $11,000 if "all Medicare beneficiaries" were to receive it. According to the CBO's scoring, Ryan's proposal would have increased the financial burden of health care on seniors:  Under the Roadmap, the value of the voucher would be less than expected Medicare spending per enrollee in 2021, when the voucher program would begin. In addition, Medicare's current payment rates for providers are lower than those paid by commercial insurers, and the program's administrative costs are lower than those for individually purchased insurance. Beneficiaries would therefore face higher premiums in the private market for a package of benefits similar to that currently provided by Medicare. Moreover, the value of the voucher would grow significantly more slowly than CBO expects that Medicare spending per enrollee would grow under current law. Beneficiaries would therefore be likely to purchase less comprehensive health plans or plans more heavily managed than traditional Medicare, resulting in some combination of less use of health care services and less use of technologically advanced treatments than under current law. Beneficiaries would also bear the financial risk for the cost of buying insurance policies or the cost of obtaining health care services beyond what would be covered by their insurance.
• Federal salaries. On the April 14 edition of Glenn Beck, he proposed cutting salaries for federal employees so that the average federal salary would match the average private-sector wage, claiming that this would save between $44 and $104 billion. However, this amounts to only one to three percent of all federal spending.
• Education. The April 15 edition of Glenn Beck was devoted to eliminating the Department of Education. As Media Matters noted at the time, conservative Republican politicians have been promising since 1980 to eliminate the Education Department to no avail. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, education accounted for just two percent of all federal spending in 2008.